Getting Misogyny, Racism and Homophobia Out of Gaming

Disable player chat by ackthpt · 2014-03-21 10:50 · Score: 5, Funny

That's the quickest way.

--

A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar

Re:Disable player chat by Penguinisto · 2014-03-21 11:06 · Score: 4, Insightful

Down that path lies perdition. I'll explain:
The moment you start "cleaning up" the design and atmosphere of a game, you open the door to censorship, even if self-imposed.
While ordinarily clearing such things out of a given game is, on the surface, a laudable goal, there's one great big problem: There is no objective definition and delineation of terms like "mysogyny", "racism", or "homophobia". I have seen people called "racist" point-blank because they disagreed with the president's policies, or called "homophobic" because they believe homosexual activity to be a moral wrong (though not a crime, or cause to hate someone, or etc).
Given this, first, okay, you clear out the obvious stuff. But then some loudmouthed political action group starts squealing about things which kinda-sorta-might-count, but likely don't. Next thing you know, you're having to nerf the game entirely, and are stuck with an ever-decreasing list of genres, or wildly inaccurate ones just to satisfy the perpetually-offended.
Screw it - let the market decide: If a game is truly offensive, word will get out and it won't be bought, leading to its failure. No one is forcing anyone to buy a given game, FFS.

--
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Re:Disable player chat by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-21 11:10 · Score: 2, Funny

Heir’s argument went on to debunk studies which claim that games with female protagonists are doomed to have poor sales. He said that he believes such studies, including one which Polygon’s Ben Kuchera published during his time writing for the now defunct Penny Arcade Report, rely on "cherry-picked, inconclusive data."
"When a game starring a woman comes out," Heir said, "the marketing and the development spends are simply less, which can overall impact the quality of the game and [its] success, which skews the numbers in the negative."
Screw this. If there's a woman in the game, she better be hot or I'm not buying the game. These guys are selling fantasy. I want my fantasy hot and sexy, otherwise I'll go watch porn and not bother with the stupid game play, or obnoxious time-sink quests or the obnoxious early teen goofs who get off on being jerks. My life is full of more than enough reality, I want to buy some misogyny and sexism, not some PC-BS. This is what keeps me sane and provides a catharsis so I don't do this stuff in real life.
Re:Disable player chat by ackthpt · 2014-03-21 11:18 · Score: 2, Insightful

He's talking about the messages baked into the game by the developer, not those from the interactions with other players. He's also not limiting his comments to multi player games.
How about we just play a bunch of movies and commercials from the good ol' days (1950's and before) where this sort of stuff was the norm.
look kids, a woman, and see how happy she is with a new vacuum cleaner!

--

A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Re:Disable player chat by Simonetta · 2014-03-21 11:30 · Score: 4, Funny

" His GDC talk focused on 'misogyny, sexism, racism, ethnocentrism, nationalism, ageism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, queerphobia and other types of social injustice.' "
Boy, this one is a challenge. Wish I had Will Shortz here to help. But I'll do the best I can:
Capital Crime: Example in a game comment:
misogyny You dumb fuck, you fight like a girl
sexism You dumb chick, you don't fight worth a fuck
racism You fight like a white boy.
ethnocentrism You fight like a French white boy.
nationalism You fight like a French white boy. USA, fuckin' A!
ageism You fight like an old French white boy. USA, fuckin' A!
ableism You fight like an old French white boy in a wheelchair. USA, fuckin' A! ,
homophobia, You fight like an old French faggot white boy in a wheelchair. USA, fuckin' A! ,
transphobia You fight like an old French faggot white boy in a wheelchair who dropped her dick on the floor. USA, fuckin' A!
queerphobia You fight like an old French faggot white boy in a wheelchair who dropped her dick in his boyfriend's asshole. USA, fuckin' A!
Did I miss anything?
Re:Disable player chat by MouseTheLuckyDog · 2014-03-21 11:30 · Score: 3, Informative

You do know that feminism isn't about hating on men or trying to mooch off society right? Evidently you don't.
Well that is because there is empirical evidence to the contrary.
Re:Disable player chat by sideslash · 2014-03-21 11:31 · Score: 5, Insightful

You do know that feminism isn't about hating on men or trying to mooch off society right? Evidently you don't.
Depends on which feminists you are talking about. Are you really unaware of the wide spectrum of activism that falls under the term "feminism"?
Re:Disable player chat by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-21 11:32 · Score: 4, Insightful

"Because, you know, being part of a movement looking to improve the rights of historically opressed groups makes their arguments crap."
Yes, actually, in practice it does. At some point they go beyond improvement, then to parody, then to active harm of others. Too many groups keep going long after the problem is solved, and seek to create problems where there are none so they can be "solved" - usually by force.
Re:Disable player chat by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-21 11:46 · Score: 5, Funny

You mean parity, but feminism has indeed reached parody.
Re:Disable player chat by buraco_espinhoso · 2014-03-21 11:50 · Score: 4, Insightful

Yeah communism is all about equality too. Textbook "isms" aren't the same as in practice "isms". For starters if they really mean equality they should start by changing the name. It doesn't help if even your name is biased.
Re:Disable player chat by ackthpt · 2014-03-21 11:56 · Score: 2

How about former governor of California, Ahnold, who referred to legislators as "girlie" men? I wonder how the women in the legislature felt about that. Probably not particularly enamored with the governator. Certainly enough in the electorate were willing to overlook it. :-|
It's not just games, but cultural and it comes up all the time, thing is, most people's detectors don't go off because they aren't attuned to it being offensive.

--

A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Re:Disable player chat by russotto · 2014-03-21 12:13 · Score: 4, Insightful

How about we just play a bunch of movies and commercials from the good ol' days (1950's and before) where this sort of stuff was the norm.
AMC did that, they called it "Mad Men" and women loved it. Go figure.
Re:Disable player chat by epyT-R · 2014-03-21 12:20 · Score: 3, Insightful

As opposed to today's commercials and tv programs where she's the 'empowered' bitch and he's the insipid, incompetent little pantywaist? I fail to see the improvement. When she does it, she's 'empowered', and when he does it, he's a bastard... such 'equality'.
Re:Disable player chat by mellon · 2014-03-21 12:29 · Score: 5, Insightful

Yeah, there's a lot in Mad Men about the women of that era heroically dealing with the crap that's shoveled at them day after day. It's kind of the major theme of the series, actually. So yeah, women loved it, but not because it was misogynistic.
Re:Disable player chat by mjr167 · 2014-03-21 12:35 · Score: 4, Insightful

If we are to claim that games are an art form akin to books, movies, poetry, music, and painting, then we have to accept that art often is designed to make us uncomfortable. Often, an artist calls attention to an issue by exploring it. For example, you have a gay protagonist who struggles with his own inner lack of acceptance and self-confidence as well as fears of how society views him. You include a scene where the gay guy gets beat up because he is gay. A successful artist would establish empathy between the character and the player, causing the player to question the moral implications of the scenario. Maybe he was ok with beating up gay guys before, but now he has established a bond with this character and thus becomes uncomfortable with the scene and questions long held beliefs?
It is not about turning the games into something like Sesame Street or Magical Friendship Land where we watch everyone get along. The stories that resonate the deepest with us are the stories that hit the closest to home. It is ok to portray the struggle of social injustice. To try to pretend that it does not exist is foolish and will not send a message other than "look how PC". Instead it is about creating a story that feels real, causes us to empathize with the characters, and thus question our own personal prejudices.
Re:Disable player chat by noh8rz10 · 2014-03-21 13:14 · Score: 2, Interesting

i don't really see any feminist activities these days, only people blaming feminism for stuff.
Re:Disable player chat by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-21 13:27 · Score: 2, Informative

try tumblr.
Re:Disable player chat by schnell · 2014-03-21 14:14 · Score: 5, Interesting

At some point they go beyond improvement, then to parody, then to active harm of others. Too many groups keep going long after the problem is solved
Very true. It can be argued that the same statement is true of labor unions, for example.
I think if you look deeply today, you'll find two major schools of "feminism" - the "academic" and the "popular." The "academic" branch of feminism - like all academia - is safely removed from the real world and traffics mainly in the Andrea Dworkin "all heterosexual intercourse is rape" and Starhawk-style schools of radical feminism. This is a holdout from pre-'80s feminism and remains the intellectual vanguard of feminism but is a small niche among women. It is, however, what Rush Limbaugh used to call "Feminazis" and Fox News still likes to call "feminism."
Popular feminism today more or less equates to what Wikipedia describes as "post-feminism" - a school of thought that basically argues that women have overcome many of the blatantly discriminatory issues of the past and need to focus on more practical issues like wage discrimination, workplace sexual harassment, etc. rather than the academic "feminist" utopian vision of a matriarchal world where everyone lives by consensus, sharing of feelings and government mandated mani-pedi sessions (except for the "butch partner" lesbians who can opt out).
All joking aside, "feminism" is not only fractured among multiple groups, but the mainstream idea of feminism today that most women subscribe to has nothing to do with the academic, radical-driven "feminism" of the 1970s that scared the bejeezus out of conservatives (and most heterosexual men). Like most things, it has evolved into something more mature and sustainable.
If you're interested in how "feminism" has meant many things over the years, the Wikipedia entry on Feminism is not a bad primer, although its editors skew towards the academic side.

--
"95% of all Slashdot .sig quotes are incorrect or completely fabricated." -Benjamin Franklin
Re:Disable player chat by Areyoukiddingme · 2014-03-21 14:21 · Score: 2, Interesting

I gather at least some of the complaints about the game industry is that the scenario you've outlined doesn't ever happen. Instead, openly gay characters are rare to the point of nonexistent in games. The closest we come is the androgynous characters of Japanese-made games. On rare occasions, one of those androgynous characters turns out to be a gay guy—in the Japanese version. When the game is translated for the US audience, somehow that aspect of the character mysteriously vanishes. Similarly, characters who are physically disabled are very rare, unless you count grotesque cyborgs, who are invariably evil.
Until recently, the only people with dark skin in games were non-human, and essentially all of them were evil. Because everyone knows demons are swarthy, right? That built-in bias is still phenomenally powerful. In the movie Constantine, the archangel Gabriel was written as evil, while being portrayed by a lily-white actress. The intent was to be shocking, and the casting very much reflected the societal assumption that white is good, dark is bad, and the violated expectation was part and parcel of the affect the movie wanted to have. That movie was released in 2005. Thirty years after the American civil rights movement, Hollywood still taps in to that cultural expectation, despite a generation of heavy political correctness in a much more visible medium than games. What chance do games have, in the face of that?
These people and others like them are making the proposition that games should become part of the engine of social engineering that has made such a ham-fisted mess of television and movies, particularly for children. They think that games are for kids, and should therefore be used to condition children the same way they try to use TV. It would be unfortunate if that were to happen. If games are to have any hope of being recognized as art, they have to be culturally relevant, and not be used as a bludgeon against culture.
When a game manages to highlight a social injustice without feeling like a bludgeon, then maybe there will be art.
Re:Disable player chat by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-21 14:34 · Score: 2, Funny

She's been brainwashed by the patriachy.
Re:Disable player chat by MisterSquid · 2014-03-21 16:59 · Score: 2, Insightful

The "academic" branch of feminism - like all academia - is safely removed from the real world and traffics mainly in the Andrea Dworkin "all heterosexual intercourse is rape" and Starhawk-style schools of radical feminism. This is a holdout from pre-'80s feminism and remains the intellectual vanguard of feminism but is a small niche among women.
As a former faculty of American Literature at at a research university, I can assure you that you have no idea what academic feminism is.
Critical theory, race studies, religious studies, psychoanalysis, film theory, subject spectator theory, semiotics, linguistics, cultural anthropology, and more are all well-understood by and -represented among the scholars and intellectuals who are recognized as feminists. Academic feminists analyze and consider the signs, systems of meaning, legal histories, social histories, cultural artifacts, popular culture, etc. etc, etc. insofar as they affect women and the people to whom women are connected, which would be every human being who has ever lived.
Feminism is multiple, not singular, and the best way to describe what drives feminists is the desire to see women—and the people and collectives to which those women are connected and by which they are constituted—to be empowered and autonomous rather than (as has historically been and, in many contexts, currently is the case) disenfranchised and subjugated.
Seriously, do yourself a favor and understand that movements that promote human welfare are good for everyone. People threatened by feminism don't understand feminism. Feminism is about making things better, flawed as some of its approaches may be.
Here's something old-school style that demonstrates some "academic" feminism from 1991: Donna Haraway's "A Cyborg Manfiesto". That's some old-school cultural anthropological feminism for you that is super awesome, fun, literate, and though-provoking.
Try it and see. Some of these people are smart and amazing. You might be surprised.
(As a straight male professor, it agonized me when young intelligent women would come to my survey on critical theory and proudly announce during our feminist section that "I am not a feminist." I am grateful to have had the opportunity to change some of these young persons' minds.)

--
blog
Re:Disable player chat by dbIII · 2014-03-21 18:25 · Score: 2

That's just weird US academia where they like to redefine words at will to win arguments and don't give a shit that they are no longer speaking English. Rumsfeld is as much a part of that (with different topics as should be obvious - but without a disclaimer "drama queens" will pretend to misunderstand) as Andrea Dworkin.
One example of that I heard was a radio interview about someone that said all pornography is harmful. The interviewer said something along the lines of - what about example X? "That's not pornography" said the weird academic - then it turned out she had a circular personal definition where if it wasn't harmful in some way it wasn't pornography. An utter waste of time and you could hear the interview treading water and rushing on the next bit of the program to avoid dead air.

So it's really got nothing to do with feminism or even academia in general. It's just attention seeking weasels that happen to dwell in that place.
Re:Disable player chat by novium · 2014-03-21 21:08 · Score: 2

That is extraordinarily disingenuous of you, to pick out two random (and highly controversial, even within academia) *second wave* feminists and represent them as the face of modern feminism (and academic feminism, at that) to the point that I can't even credit you with ignorance, like the other poster, but can only see deliberate malice. Along with quoting a fictional character from a novel and making it look like it's a direct quote by the author of the novel. FFS.
Re:Disable player chat by bogjobber · 2014-03-22 00:40 · Score: 2

Pfff... He cited both wikipedia and talk radio. I think he's got a pretty good handle on the situation, Professor Fancy Pants.
Re:Disable player chat by jez9999 · 2014-03-22 02:43 · Score: 2

In my mind both of these 'artists' are disgusting and are serving no purpose to promoting beneficial forward progress in our society.
The freedom to express oneself how one wants despite people thinking that it "serves no purpose to promoting beneficial forward progress in our society" IS a benefit in and of itself. It's a good thing for society that people are allowed to do that.

--
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.

Never gonna happen by kruach+aum · 2014-03-21 10:56 · Score: 3, Insightful

Haters gonna hate. Bigots gonna bigot. 13 year olds gonna 13-year-old.

Not until bigotry makes your appendages explode will this ever end. And maybe not even then.

Re:Wrong Subsection by kruach+aum · 2014-03-21 10:58 · Score: 2

It would be nice if they both killed each other, Braveheart-style.

Re:Standard response to "that's gay": by kruach+aum · 2014-03-21 10:59 · Score: 2

Ageist

Re: Not isms or phobias by Fwipp · 2014-03-21 11:00 · Score: 5, Insightful

It's not so much *who* they're rude toward (everyone), so much as the *way* in which they're rude.

There's a big difference between "You suck at this game" and "You play like a girl," to use the most tame example I can think of. Putting down players by implying that they're $category, using hateful slurs, only propagates the idea that $category is not a desirable thing to be. Not only are they hurting the player they're insulting, but any person in $category that is in the same game; as well as teaching the non-$category people that this is an acceptable way to act.

I've a cure by zakeria · 2014-03-21 11:02 · Score: 2

it's called Stoicism

Remove fear labeling to start objective discussion by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-21 11:05 · Score: 5, Insightful

We don't call it "race-phobia" or "men-phobia" or "women-phobia", the labelling of disagreeing with an accusation of fear (homo-phobia) does not allow the conversation to begin on a level of mutual respect, where people merely have disagreements on personal behavior.

Race and gender are not behavioral, but physiological facts, and therefore subjective debates easily point out a subject bias against an unchangeable reality. But it seems _any_ disagreement with homosexuality is instantly labeled as "hate", and I propose it's partly because of the fear label associated with disagreement.

No one expects a racist Nazi to love black people, but we absolutely expect them not to attack them. And we even enforce free speech laws that allow these people to openly run organizations that support racial superiority.

But with homosexuality it's the reverse, there is a movement to force a belief change and acceptance of another persons beliefs. Without honest objective discourse, emotionally biased labels and arguments will suppress disent that even Nazi's don't suffer under.

This social group (slashdot) espouses scientific disagreement as a basis for learning. I propose we start hearing both sides of the arugment about sexuality objectively, apply the doctrine of tolerance equally and remove the subjective and biased label of "homophobia" to those they merely disent.

Morals & DRM by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-21 11:07 · Score: 5, Insightful

I play games for fun, not morals. Your beliefs about a moral actions may not be other's so adding your "correct" action in a game then give rewards for the right" choice is just another way of enforcing your beliefs on others.

For example I believe Homophobia is wrong, I have a right to stop someone else who is hurting another either physically or verbally, But I do not have the right to force the attacker to change his/her views, they are his/her choices and he/she believes them to be right just as he/she doesn't have the right to make me join in.

And everyone I know hates DRM's not for the fact they stop piracy (kinda) but as yet no DRM has been seamless. Frequent disconnects, ridiculous sign-up's (eg making a live account) The inability to access some content offline or even unable to play the game at all offline. We live in a world when you can't always be online, esp if you live in rural area or have bandwidth limitations. So hate about DRM's is completely justified, if you want to stop piracy look at why people pirate games, not some lackluster attempt at stopping them, you won't win, so far every DRM has been breached.

PS: by Penguinisto · 2014-03-21 11:08 · Score: 3, Insightful

Seriously - would anyone have even bothered with titles like DOAX or Duke Nuke'Em if it didn't have the content it had?

They both sold like effing mad... I'll leave it up to the reader to decide why they think that is.

--
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?

Bans don't work by Scowler · 2014-03-21 11:11 · Score: 2

If you ban a player for a short interval, it's not enough to dissuade bad behavior. If you choose a long interval, they just join the game under a different player name. In essence, if a player's behavior has already deteriorated to the point of needing a ban, the battle is already lost.

huh? by Fwipp · 2014-03-21 11:12 · Score: 2, Insightful

Yes, the "market" is going to magically erase misogyny in gaming, because here's these games that sold super well for being misogynist.

Re:huh? by Penguinisto · 2014-03-21 11:14 · Score: 5, Insightful

...neither of them stack up to "Leisure Suit Larry". Funny thing is, I know of more women who bought that particular game then men, mostly because it was funnier than hell.
But then, the ladies in question weren't overly-sensitive professional victims, either.

--
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Re:huh? by lonOtter · 2014-03-21 13:21 · Score: 2

"tasteless" is utterly subjective and jokes are jokes, no matter how "tasteless" you believe them to be.

--
[End Of Line]
Re:huh? by AmiMoJo · 2014-03-21 21:34 · Score: 2

*sigh* Why does Slashdot always seem to miss the point?
Games like the Larry series are mostly fine. They are done in good taste, genuinely funny and enjoyable for both sexes. The problem, as TFA points out, is with the relatively small number of people who play online games and spew racist, homophobic and misogynistic abuse. As the GP points out you end up blocking all chat to get rid of it. Why can't I play COD4 online without being called a fag?

--
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Re: huh? by AlphaWolf_HK · 2014-03-21 23:44 · Score: 2

Actually what's generally known about the more primitive societies is that they tended to be more matriarchal. Along with patriarchal societies came monogamy (something women tend to want more than men do, ironically) and fairness was codified (aka laws.)
Indeed, most animals are very matriarchal as well.

--
Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK

Don't buy it then by geekd · 2014-03-21 11:12 · Score: 3, Insightful

If the content of a videogame offends you, then don't buy it. If enough people don't buy offensive video games, people won't make offensive video games.

Telling other people "you should do this" or "you should not do that" only pisses them off and wastes your time.

Re:Don't buy it then by Shados · 2014-03-21 11:16 · Score: 4, Insightful

This is more about the behavior of the community than the content of the game though.
Re:Don't buy it then by lonOtter · 2014-03-21 12:37 · Score: 2

Disapproving of pedophiles and rapists is generally supported.

Which is largely ignorance caused by the irrational and hateful "for the children" crowd that tries to take away our rights (through censorship, "Tough On Crime" policies, and generally laws which punish even the innocent). Pedophiles aren't necessarily child molesters, and vice versa. A pedophile is not even necessarily attracted only to children.

--
[End Of Line]

Getting Misogyny, Racism and Homophobia Out by Citizen+of+Earth · 2014-03-21 11:12 · Score: 4, Funny

Just delete the humans and you're all set.

Yes, it's gonna happen by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-21 11:17 · Score: 3, Insightful

The goal isn't to eradicate bigotry, but to lessen it as much as we can. By that measure we can, and we have succeeded. Yes, there will always be more work to do. But, overall, the world is a better place today than it was centuries ago if you are a woman, racial minority, and/or LGBT. The question is not "can we create a utopia." Obviously not. But can we make the world better than it is today? Yes, absolutely.

How? We do it by ignoring comments like yours, and working at it anyway. Your comment isn't just pessimistic, it's oppressive. It strengthens the status quo. I'm sure you have good intentions and don't outwardly hate people. I don't think you're a bigot, but you're standing in the way of progress by trying to discourage people from even attempting to improve the world. Please don't do that.

Oh, that's easy by Fwipp · 2014-03-21 11:17 · Score: 2, Insightful

So, if instead of saying homophobia, I said heterosexism, all my arguments would instantly be valid? Weird that you're hung up on a word you don't understand the meaning of.

We enforce free speech laws that allow the Westboro Baptist Church to protest, don't we? Why is that "the reverse" of protecting racist Nazi's?

Oh, you mean that you want to be able to shit on other people, and face no *social* backlash? That doesn't work for Nazis, either, sorry.

where's the fun in that? by stenvar · 2014-03-21 11:19 · Score: 4, Interesting

Gaming is one of the last bastions where political incorrectness survives. I hope it will stay that way and that gaming won't get invaded by the armies of the politically correct spoilsports. And, yes, I am a minority and a target of some of these "-isms" and "-phobias".

Re:where's the fun in that? by stenvar · 2014-03-21 12:47 · Score: 4, Insightful

Yes, because having some 13 year old yelling "YOUR TEH GHEY FAGOT LOL" is so much fun.
That... I don't care about. But I want characters to stay... in character. An 1960's Italian mafia boss should usually be a misogynist who likes big boobs, a 1980's black teenage gang member character is going to be homophobic, and a 1930's Nazi character should be anti-semitic. Trying to pretend otherwise is just stupid. And even for actual human players, I prefer if they don't pretend to be something they are not.
Of course, it is good if game developers actually have players and game characters that are diverse. On the other hand, they should shut up about framing this as a question of "social justice". I don't want "social justice" meted out to me by some left wing game developer because he thinks it's the right thing to do for poor, helpless me; I want him to take me serious as a paying customer.

"peecee" by Fwipp · 2014-03-21 11:22 · Score: 2

Yes, saying that an unchangeable characteristic about a person is socially acceptable is too radical for Slashdot.

What's next? Games that say it's "okay" to be black?? Please, free market, save us from this terrible fate!

Myogyny? by roc97007 · 2014-03-21 11:24 · Score: 4, Insightful

I wonder, who gets to decide? Does this mean that all game avatars will be wearing grey coveralls like THX1138?

.And how do you resolve the "it's misogynist to have women avatars in combat" and "it's misogynist *not* to have women avatars in combat" groups?

--
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.

Re:Myogyny? by Laxori666 · 2014-03-21 14:07 · Score: 3, Insightful

But women are more valuable. Kill 90% of the men and the population will continue on quite well. Kill 90% of the women and you've got a problem.

Extrapolation by Fwipp · 2014-03-21 11:41 · Score: 2

It's not hard to extrapolate.

If I say "hey, hey, woah, let's check out BOTH SIDES of the evolution argument" - it's not hard to figure out that I don't "believe" in evolution. Just because your literal words sound objective, doesn't mean that they are.

Re:Standard response to "that's gay": by sexconker · 2014-03-21 11:41 · Score: 2

In the US it's legal to age discriminate against anyone under 40.

I've always found it ridiculous that our anti-ageist laws were themselves ageist.

Re:Standard response to "that's gay": by Stormy+Dragon · 2014-03-21 11:47 · Score: 3, Funny

I've found an effective way of dealing with homophobia online is to start flirting with them. They HATE when you do that.

Further: by fyngyrz · 2014-03-21 11:55 · Score: 4, Insightful

Mommying game content does not address the actual problem (abject stupidity), and creates another one: the watering down of content that resembles the world you thought up.

Also, game developers, take note: People mostly only have a very low count of legitimate mommies. Please do not think even for a moment that it is appropriate that you decide outsiders can, or should, fill that role in limiting your creative output. In architecting a game, please think of yourself as a god, responsible to no one, and without concern for who thinks what about whatever, except as you want them to. That's *much* better: we call this creative freedom, and good grief, do I ever want you to have it. You, and writers, and all other artists.

If you want to support (fill in group), by all means do so. Give them money, time, bags of cat food, speak to them, speak at their outreach events if they think you have something to contribute, but do not, under any circumstances, decide those groups have the chops to decide what's good for everyone else and limit what you actually want to do accordingly.

Aside from the obvious problems, this trend has very dark mirrors we can see all around us; for instance, fox news thinks its perfectly ok to distort the living heck out of any sane narrative of events, past, present or future, and then bottle-feed it to their audience.

If you want to make a game, just make the game. Don't second guess anyone, don't try to be the obedient dog of the morality police or the ethical police or the politically correct police or the religious police or the atheist police... just build your world the way you think you want it and see if people like it.

We have plenty of individuals and groups vying for the position of mommy already. Please don't add to this problem. And it is, most assuredly, a problem.

--
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.

Re:Further: by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-21 14:09 · Score: 2, Insightful

How is saying that the major games makers are censoring themselves to avoid putting off white male straight gamers and they should be more open to non male non white or non straight charters and stories a cry for censorship? The complaint is specifically that they are treating gamers as sensitive and easily hurt by things that only mater to a small stupid and not particularly profitable minority and that they should stop.
Re:Further: by 0111+1110 · 2014-03-21 17:14 · Score: 2, Informative

You misunderstand the problem
Actually I think you are the one who misunderstands the problem. There is no real problem. Bioware is well known as the LGBT developer. That's what they do now. They cater to the lesbian audience. It's basically lesbian romance fiction with some boring combat thrown in. This article is just marketing for them. Trying to drum up business by claiming that all other developers should be exactly like them and only hire lesbian writers to write about lesbian characters for a mostly lesbian audience.
I don't see anything wrong with Bioware catering exclusively to one particular sexual orientation and attempting to appeal exclusively to those lesbians of lesser intelligence who think Harlequin Romances are great works of fiction. But I do see something wrong with them trying to claim that everyone else should be doing the same and that if they choose not to then they must be racist sexist bigots. Bioware is arguing in favor of self-censorship and their own form of sexism. Discrimination against the majority is still discrimination. IMO censorship is still wrong even when it is self-censorship or corporate profit motivated censorship.

--
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
Re:Further: by hairyfeet · 2014-03-21 21:36 · Score: 2

The problem is ALL of these groups end up taken over by the nutters. Look at how MADD went from simply wanting folks to have a designated driver or calling a cab when they have been drinking to having a leader who has outright said bringing back prohibition is the goal, or how PETA went from the humane treatment of food animals to labeling fish as "sea kittens" (I swear to God, look it up) and saying that antibiotics is wrong since you are killing living bacteria..../facepalm/.
Ultimately all this political correct bullshit gives us is "acceptable targets" and protected classes. For example the stink recently over how playable female characters aren't in shooters anymore, yet when I asked the females screaming murder about this "discrimination" "So you would have NO problem with me blowing body parts off a woman or teabagging her corpse in a shooter as is done now with men?" they screamed and said that it should be outright banned if any game had that.
So I hope all these game devs tell these PC police to fuck right off. Hell put that on the box and I'll rush out and buy it, I thought Postal II was a hoot precisely because it was so anti-PC and I'm sure there are plenty just like me that would be happy to support devs that make fun games and damn the PC police. Hell if you made No One Lives Forever today they'd probably scream the heroine was unacceptable because she used lipstick bombs and bobby pin lockpicks even though the POINT was to make fun of the James Bond of the 60s with the dumb gadgets!

--
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.

Re:What's Important? by sexconker · 2014-03-21 11:56 · Score: 2

+10 enchanted undergarments

Mormons.

Representation != Political Correctness by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-21 11:57 · Score: 3, Interesting

I know reading the article is against ther terms of service here or something, but most of the points the speaker seemed to be making were more about equal representation in games, and how we can do better than having most games stars straight white males. The argument that audiences can't connect with characters of other colors, genders, ages, sexual orientations, or gender identity is suspect, given the diversity of the gaming population.

There's a difference between this and "political correctness" or "feminism", or "The LGBT agenda" people are so quick to demonize. An argument that we should have a richer pool of stories to experience is pretty hard to argue with, if you ask me.

"B" by Fwipp · 2014-03-21 11:59 · Score: 2

So, you think that straight & gay people could choose to be bisexual? I guess?

And sure, you legitimately think that. There are people who legitimately think the earth is 6000 years old, too. Doesn't make you any less wrong.

Re:Remove fear labeling to start objective discuss by Anonymous Coward · 2014-03-21 12:01 · Score: 2, Insightful

Race and gender are not behavioral, but physiological facts...

Your argument is horribly flawed. Sexuality is also a physiological fact in an adult, how it forms is still being investigated but the brains of gay and straight women and men can be scanned to show differences. Nazis are racist by choice whilst homosexuals are not gay by choice because really, there are few reasons to choose it and many not to; why would you choose to be gay in a country like Uganda or Russia where you're likely to be killed because people are afraid that you'll cause all sorts of ills to befall society.

We use the term phobia because the overwhelming majority of the hate stems from a fear response which, like the majority of fears, stems from a lack of understanding, and tends to reside in the uneducated or religious (which have some overlap). It's a useful description, and frames the discussion correctly.

As for a disagreement on personal behaviour... that's bizarre. It's someone else's behaviour, is a natural behaviour for them, and doesn't affect you or hurt anybody. Why 'disagree' with it if not, at some level, out of fear?

Re:Wrong Subsection by mellon · 2014-03-21 12:43 · Score: 2

Right, so, a person doesn't have to be a "victim" to get ticked off about discrimination that focuses on their group. They just have to be a person. Because just about anybody who is a target of discrimination is going to get pissed off about it. My experience is that the people who are making noise about this don't consider themselves to be victims. They consider themselves to be pissed off customers, demanding better from the people who are making the product they are using. It's like complaining because the airline doesn't get you to your destination on time. That doesn't make you a victim.

Re:Wrong Subsection by mellon · 2014-03-21 12:47 · Score: 2

I bet if you went into a regular bar and people in the bar started groping you, you wouldn't like it. Or if they started making rude comments about your gender, or your package, or your hair. Women like to game too. So games aren't analogous to gay bars. They are analogous to bars, if we go with the basic theme of your analogy. And what is being proposed here is that the bouncers toss your ass out of the bar if you harass the other patrons.

Outlook as parent with daughters by VikingNation · 2014-03-21 13:16 · Score: 3, Interesting

I wonder do male gamers with daughters think differently about games that promote violence against women then single male gamers with no children? As a father of girls I cannot in a clear coconscious buy games that have sexists concepts and promote violence against women.

Yet more pussification of America by kurzweilfreak · 2014-03-21 13:38 · Score: 3, Informative

Whatever happened to "sticks and stones"? Are we such wimps that we're now going out of our way to be offended by the fantasy worlds that we're voluntarily taking part in?

--

kurzweil_freak

5th Kyu Genbukan Ninpo/KJJR student

Be the darkness that allows the light to shine.

all gaming by globaljustin · 2014-03-21 14:00 · Score: 2

GP's solution..."Disable player chat" is a classic example of "throwing the baby out with the bathwater"

It's a problem in our industry, thinking this way, b/c it's ridiculous. Turning it off isn't a "fix" and it never will be.

I don't know about TFA...but as you say:

He's talking about the messages baked into the game by the developer, not those from the interactions with other players. He's also not limiting his comments to multi player games.

I'm saying it's all part of the same thing. idk, maybe you and TFA author would agree with me there, but I feel it's important to drive home that compartmentalizing these issues into little sub-domains is not a solution.

We all have to change, and be vocal about it. We have to "show people" by doing the things they would expect ***AND*** we have to actually do it, too...which means going down some hallways that most geeks would rather keep in the dark.

Virtually everything about gaming is designed to appeal to a particular adolescent male sensibility....it's unnecessary (see: NES & Super Nintendo) and it **alienates women**

"gaming" isn't a bunch of guys in a room farting & quoting "Princess Bride" or fatasses in their underwear on the headset...well...it doesn't have to be

--
Thank you Dave Raggett

Re:Remove fear labeling to start objective discuss by drinkypoo · 2014-03-21 14:05 · Score: 3, Insightful

No one expects a racist Nazi to love black people, but we absolutely expect them not to attack them. And we even enforce free speech laws that allow these people to openly run organizations that support racial superiority.

And we also look down on them and pity them for how pathetic they are, and many of us with they would die or at least stop breeding, all the same stuff that people have to say about gays that they would like us all to respect as a valid view. Well, that's not going to happen, so just build a bridge and get over that motherfucker. Homosexuality is older than any religion or indeed belief system with us today, it's not going anywhere — your belief system is.

This social group (slashdot) espouses scientific disagreement as a basis for learning. I propose we start hearing both sides of the arugment about sexuality objectively,

Objectively, the idea that some people's sexuality is okay and other people's sexuality isn't when neither group is harming the other is subjective, and therefore fails your own test. Go away and do not troll us a second time.

--
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"

Axe by phorm · 2014-03-21 14:11 · Score: 4, Insightful

As opposed to the Axe cologne, Hanes underwear etc guys who are of course of perfectly average build?

Yes, sexy women in ads sell... guess what, so do sexy guys. Very few ads with models are realistic in terms of average body/muscle/fat mass.

The geek in denial. by westlake · 2014-03-21 14:19 · Score: 5, Insightful

Sound more like feminist victimization rehashed...

Sounds to me more like game developers are thinking long and hard about what is happening elsewhere in the entertainment industry.

["Frozen"] took the No. 13 spot on the all-time worldwide box office list this week, passing "Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace" and "Jurassic Park."

It's been a big week for "Frozen," which has been in the top ten at the box office in the U.S. and Canada for 17 weeks.

On Wednesday, Disney said that "Frozen" had sold 3.2 million DVD and Blu-Rays on Tuesday, becoming one of the biggest home entertainment debuts in recent years.

Disney chairman and chief executive Robert Iger told shareholders Tuesday that "Frozen" was on pace to be the most successful animated film in history, surpassing "Toy Story 3," which ranks No. 11 on the all-time list with $1.063 billion.

And thanks to its ubiquitous anthem "Let it Go," the soundtrack has sold over 1.4 million albums in the U.S. It has also been streamed more than 100 million times on Spotify.

'Frozen' surpasses 'Jurassic Park' on all-time box office list

In Blu-Ray sales at Amazon, "Frozen" is #1, "Catching Fire" #2 and "Gravity" in 3D #10.

The point being that ditching gender stereotypes in mass media can have a very big financial payoff. If it means ditching the foul mouthed, misogynistic and eternally adolescent male audience that perpetuates these stereotypes, that can be a price worth paying.

Re:The geek in denial. by westlake · 2014-03-21 19:08 · Score: 2

Are you seriously trying to argue the merit of a film based on ticket sales? Or about which hole some character in the film likes to fuck?
You haven't a clue about the content or themes of "Frozen," "The Hunger Games" trilogy or "Gravity."
"The Art of Frozen," out of print, and in fine condition, sells at the rare book price of $100. The sheet music for "Frozen" is #49 in book sales at Amazon, #1 in all categories of music book sales at Amazon, Frozen: Music from the Motion Picture Soundtrack
"Frozen" in 3D is #7 in DVD and Blu-Ray sales at Amazon.co.uk. Frozen [Blu-ray 3D + Blu-ray] [Region Free]
3D, remember, is a video technology the geek fondly likes to think is defunct.
We are not talking about throwaways here --- we are talking products that a film's core audience consider an essential buy-in --- and it happens damn rarely on this scale.
The "merit" of the film isn't essential to my argument.
That a film released on Thanksgiving Day remains a top ten box office draw in the states past St. Patrick's Day is. That "Frozen" was successfully translated into at least 43 languages and a hit in every one of them means you have a product with a global reach and appeal.
That will have the producer of the AAA game or low-budget Indie sitting up and listening,
But if you insist on some measure of "quality," the Wikipedia lists some 59 wins and 94 nominations to date for "Frozen" in all categories. List of accolades received by Frozen (2013 film)

Translation please by Hognoxious · 2014-03-21 14:20 · Score: 3, Funny

We should use the ability of our medium to show players the issues first-hand, or give them a unique understanding of the issues and complexities by crafting game mechanics along with narrative components that result in dynamics of play that create meaning for the player in ways that other media isn't capable of.

I didn't major in underwater basket-weaving, so can someone translate that into English please?

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."

Re:Remove fear labeling to start objective discuss by TubeSteak · 2014-03-21 14:39 · Score: 2

I could pick apart the entire post, but I think this is the core of the discussion:

apply the doctrine of tolerance equally

If we were doing this, we wouldn't be having conversations about homophobia and bigotry.

Your entire post is very well written, but essentially boils down to "tolerate the intolerance."
The only proper response to that is "No."

--
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!

Re:Hypocrisy by epyT-R · 2014-03-21 14:46 · Score: 2

Yes, because anyone that dares question doctrine is a bigot who must be silenced, right?

Their choice, my money by the_Bionic_lemming · 2014-03-21 14:49 · Score: 2

I hope they make a profit over their decision to remove freedom and dissension over popular opinion.

I won't be funding it.

I prefer gaming - not having to cry over social issues and dwell over how insecure I might be.

--
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!

I have a better idea by slashmydots · 2014-03-21 15:00 · Score: 2

How about instead of convincing everyone to behave, you convince everyone to stop being oversensitive idiots who care what others say. I for one do not give a shit what some random assholes type about me online. I don't know them and I have no reason to respect their opinion of me. They can say anything they want to me and I sincerely don't care. That is a healthier mindset to have than constantly basing your self-image on what others think of you, especially anonymous people. The people who get all worked up about it are the ones with the actual problem.

Bullshit by Charliemopps · 2014-03-21 16:08 · Score: 2

Bullshit. Make fun games. Making a fake utopia inside games is about as plausible as doing it in real life. People fucking suck... and to enjoy life you'd can pretend they don't exist. You need to learn how to have fun despite them. The same goes for games. The only thing worse than someone that say insulting things is someone that wont let you speak because they're afraid you'll say something wrong.

Put on Big Girl pants and play the f-ing game by MonsterMasher · 2014-03-21 17:31 · Score: 2

Look, we get enough anti-male crap from all around by you assholes, and a few of s like to escape that abuse (for being a disposable, devalued male) by Gov, companies, general psycho-bithces that can shut-up about wanting more money or you spending time with other people so are not as easily abused, etc.. or hell, I think kicking guys in the balls is what half those assholes do to get back because they are failing even though they have so many personal advantage as a man.. so you hate them.. and want to compete.
I - like so many - have had enough of this crap.
As long as I have breath I will continue to argue that misandric feminism is so widely and completely intertwined with most of the feminist policy that government is using, in every aspect of life, real and jaw-dropping personal and sexual freedom, police policy, family law, criminal law, criminal penalties, and nearly a free pass to use the 'rape' accusation to get that extra edge for those so psycho-twisted as to do it to save less then $20 cab fair. And never a day in jail - but send him away for 20 years as a sex predator without a blink- to be raped daily.
F-ing psychos that keep this silent or lie about 'small numbers'.
So.. you don't like bad words.. well, we all get them - please put on you big girl pants, please. I won't give you shit unless you continue to act the idiot twit you seem to glorify so much.
Please, all, feel free to speak out about this BS.

Re:It's about money, not sexism by dbIII · 2014-03-21 18:57 · Score: 2

Most Japanese anime seems to be about female heroines

Studio Ghibli definitely has a thing about that and made a lot of fine films with universal appeal (although Disney just did not know what hit them with "Princess Mononoko" so limited the international distribution for years), but in anime there are also a lot with male heroes.

To be cynical a lot of the ones with heroines is probably a marketing thing - if you want to have family appeal you want something that's going to appeal to the mother to get her to bring the kids along. A lot of other stuff seems directly aimed at getting teenage girls into the cinemas or in front of the TV to watch the advertisements. Some is most definitely a "girls can be brave/strong/individuals/etc" effort (eg. Utena, which is a weird fairytale style story that's really about getting out of abusive relationships) but it's aimed at a society that is even more about male dominated conformity than many western cultures. Also some is "Tomb Raider" heroine as eye candy just like in the west.
Anyway, enough of that. I've probably not written anything that half the people here don't already know.

One last word on Utena - the one minute intro to the TV series sets it up well. Little girl is in peril, she's saved by a Prince. The little girl says to herself "he's so wonderful, when I grow up I want to be a Prince too and save people in trouble." The movie however seems to be the result of a bet with the director of Evangelion as to who can confuse the fans more - best watched like a rock video.

No by tsotha · 2014-03-21 23:32 · Score: 2

We should use the ability of our medium to show players the issues first-hand, or give them a unique understanding of the issues and complexities by crafting game mechanics along with narrative components that result in dynamics of play that create meaning for the player in ways that other media isn't capable of.

No. I do not want to be preached at while I'm gaming, and if you put that kind of crap in the game I won't buy it.

Re:You've lost me but it sounds interesting by Cederic · 2014-03-22 03:34 · Score: 2

lesbian overtones in a guy in a diving suit

Locking the man into an airtight container to minimise his influence

with a drill on his arm

..but retaining the body horror fear of penetration he represents

and a little girl sticking a syringe in dead bodies

..then subverting it into a female penetration scenario, taking advantaged of the neutered (dead) males.

Slashdot Mirror

Getting Misogyny, Racism and Homophobia Out of Gaming

80 of 704 comments (clear)