Getting Misogyny, Racism and Homophobia Out of Gaming

An anonymous reader writes "A central theme for several talks at this week's Game Developers Conference has been how to deal with the abuse generated by a small segment of gamers. BioWare's Manveer Heir says he wants the industry to stop being scared of challenging the most outspoken and vituperative members of the gaming community. His GDC talk focused on 'misogyny, sexism, racism, ethnocentrism, nationalism, ageism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, queerphobia and other types of social injustice.' He said, '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.' Meanwhile, Adam Orth, who became the center of an internet hatestorm last year after an offhand comment about always-online DRM, said game developers should make an effort to encourage their playerbase to behave in a more civilized manner."

Comments

Disable player chat

[ackthpt]

That's the quickest way.

Re:Disable player chat

[Penguinisto]

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.

Re:Disable player chat

[Simonetta]

" 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

[sideslash]

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

[Anonymous Coward]

"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

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean parity, but feminism has indeed reached parody.

Re:Disable player chat

[buraco_espinhoso]

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

[russotto]

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

[mellon]

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

[mjr167]

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

[schnell]

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.

Re: Not isms or phobias

[Fwipp]

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.

Remove fear labeling to start objective discussion

[Anonymous Coward]

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

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Getting Misogyny, Racism and Homophobia Out

[Citizen of Earth]

Just delete the humans and you're all set.

Re:huh?

[Penguinisto]

...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.

Re:Don't buy it then

[Shados]

This is more about the behavior of the community than the content of the game though.

where's the fun in that?

[stenvar]

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?

[stenvar]

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.

Myogyny?

[roc97007]

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?

Further:

[fyngyrz]

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.

Axe

[phorm]

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.

[westlake]

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.