Slashdot Mirror
Sweden Considers Adding "Sexism" Ratings To Video Games
An anonymous reader writes A government-funded agency in Sweden is considering creating special labels for video games based on whether or not the games' portrayals of women are sexist. From the article: "Avoiding sexism and gender stereotypes in video games produced in Sweden will become a key goal for the association, which has been given a 272,000 kronor ($36,672) grant by Sweden's government-funded innovation agency, Vinnova. Inspired by the Bechdel test, which looks at whether fictional films or books feature at least two women talking about a topic other than men, Dataspelsbranchen will work with several game developers to analyze how Swedish video games portray female characters and gender issues.
I personally won't care a whit about this one but more detailed ratings can only be a good thing. I envision an ecosystem of metadata ranging from "suitability for playing in a car on a laptop" to "power usage profile" It's not like the world is short on disk space.
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
Inspired by the Bechdel test, which looks at whether fictional films or books feature at least two women talking about a topic other than men,
Yes its nice to have some lesbian action too
Hmm, that might not be a deterrent to sales...
>based on whether or not the games' portrayals of women are sexist.
Just for women ? That's really sexist !
How about dropping the pretense and going with 'sexy' instead?
Let's see you sell them games as "free of any sexy", "does not contain sexy", or the R rated "may contain traces of sexy".
Sexist is just for fucking women now? Fuck you. Avoid gender stereotypes? Fine, I'm okay if you want to label it, but what's good for the gander is good for the goose.
Take out sexism and gender stereo types for men too. If there is anyone in beefy 8 packs, with blowing everything up, that's unrealistic for men, so put a rating on it. We need to protect women and men from unrealistic views.
Here is what you're really doing and where my problem lies, it's not that you're trying to protect women from the games, you are trying to label men.
Oh, you buy sexist video games, you must be sexist. Yeah, better stop anyone from liking things you don't desire with social manipulation, sounds about right.
Equality - Men are no better than women, and vice versa, you know how many of my female friends gush over fabio, the lean body with tone and beautiful hair? It's not realistic, most men do not look that way.
But that's fine. However if men do the same thing, whooboy, sexist.
I'm in two minds over this.
On the one hand, the more meta-data the merrier, so long as it's a symmetric test (that is, not only considering sexist contend that is bias against women, but that which is biased against men also).
On the other hand, it saddens me that the average (modal) gamer is considered to be so socially inept as to require it to be explicitly highlighted when a fictional character is being a jerk.
Where's the marking for food of their greatest scientific discoveries of consuming anything by the truckload is poisonous or carcinogeus?
There are tons of games in which men are portrayed as vicious musclebound gun toting maniacs. If negative stereotypes is the problem, why are they only looking at the female characters in the games? is that not sexist by definition?
The most obvious negative female stereotypes in my opinion are Disney princesses (mindless bimbos in fluffy dresses), which are targeted at the youngest and most impressionable, but somehow i don't think thats what they want to target.
Time to get that dot eatting trollop. Running around with none thing else but a pink bow tie, not even strategically placed.
Not to mention the various displays she allowed of herself on the arcade cabinet.
We have a thread which combines sexism, video gamine, (and therefore implicitly gamergate), censorship, Europe and politics. I have a bag of popcorn and karma to burn. I better go clear my schedule for this afternoon because I predict this will be a fun thread.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Well it's about time...the vast cultural influence of Swedish video games here in the United States has just been too much. My brother got hooked on "Lutefisk Avenger," like he just can't stop playing it. I thought it was a bad sign when he re-designed his kitchen to look more like an IKEA showroom. Then he put mayonnaise in a toothpaste tube! If he starts becoming a computer hacker who fights Nazis I am going to have to take away his Super Nintendo.
Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
it's time we tell them to man up and stop complaining about perceived sexism. That's life, and sometimes life is unfair. Men don't talk and bitch about it, they DO something productive about it.
... With being sexual. The two are distinctly different.
Is it like a quality seal?
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
doesn't have a monopoly on stupid (especially where gov't is concerned).
1 - Label to specify what games contain sexy women. ... Slow clap?
2 - Sell labelled games more, because sex sells (news at 11).
3 - More and more games introduce sexist content just to get the label.
4 -
Can we work systemd into the discussion?
It would be disingenuous to suggest that sexism does not primarily impact women negatively.
Boys are certainly negatively impacted by macho ideals such as the importance of "being a man." Any claim that girls are negatively affected by big breasted meek women in video games must also concede that boys are negatively affected by buff macho men who can solve all problems by shooting or beating up their opponents. I think both claims are a bit over the top, but making one claim and not the other is quite hypocritical.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
So we test for sexism against women but not for sexism against men. Isn't that.... sexist?
Another example of feminism trying to impose its will upon every facet of life. And they feel completely entitled in doing so because they believe their narrative is the only valid worldview. And if you don't agree in every way you are a bigot and they will bully and shame you into oblivion until you capitulate under the social pressure. Like they did with the poor guy on the comet lander team.
And, of course, this label will be evaluated entirely upon the sexist depictions of only women, because we all know(as they've hammered into our brains) "men can't be victims of sexism because it has not been institutionalized against them".
This bullshit has to end. It must be fought fiercely at every opportunity.
The sexism is no fun if you are given advance warning.
I would give Negative grades for each of the following:
Violence
Nudity
Sexism
Racism/Stereotyping (including slights to LGBT society)
Culturally insensitive
Religiously Intolerant
Religious Indoctrination
Politically Driven Agenda
Historically Inaccurate
Positive Grades for These:
Educational
Social Responsible
Mentally Stimulating
Historically Accurate
And an overall aggregate score
Granted things like Politically Driven Agenda would be hotly contested every time and couldn’t possibly work in the real world, but this would be a near ideal list. As long as it isn’t censorship what’s wrong with full disclosure. If a game would be embarrassed to be labeled Sexism Level 4, then maybe they need to dial back the bikini babes at the race start. I wouldn't want to get too carried away with categories, others may suggest a few more, but if we keep it to under 20 that shouldn't be too over the top, more like a list of ingredients in prepackaged food.
Letter To Iran
Tell me again what this label is supposed to accomplish: Warning - Sexist Content
Tell me again what this label actually accomplished: Parental Advisory: Explicit Lyrics
hmmmm
www.facebook.com/DareDefendOurRights
www.fairtax.org
Hays Code returning under the banner of feminism.
OK, my fellow gamergaters, it's time to dox Sweden!
She lives just east of Norway and west of Finland. Make sure to visit that feminazi every day and teach her the consequences of trying to censor all games and force us to play Depression Quest!
Together we will fight to guarantee better ethics in game journalism.
I hope true equality hits so I can see all the women complaining more than men do and somehow still call it unbalanced unless they're on top. Even feminist that have reason and want real equality don't want to identify as a 'feminist' for the bad name given to them from the loudest ones who aren't asking for equality but preferred treatment.
Since every commenter on this article is an anti-feminist fuckwad with a kneejerk reaction, I doubt anyone else is going to say this, so here goes.
The problem with things like measuring sexism via "whether fictional films or books feature at least two women talking about a topic other than men" is that you create a standard that can easily be gamed. It's almost soviet in its half-bakedness. You'll just end up with developers inserting a cutscene in which two fat Russian women talk about politics under a picture of Trotsky, then cut back after the government-approved 5 minutes to the hot chick in a metal bikini with a sub-machine gun. What's the point?
Imagine that we believe that "two women talking about something other than men" was a good test, we'd therefore lose:
Colonel Samantha Carter, PhD Physicist, intergalactic heroine, smarter than God. Can program, fly fighter jets & alien spaceships, shoot and do things that they don't bother to explain because they are simply beyond us poor males to understand. So that's Stargate gone.
Lt Uhura: Dr Martin Luther King who *some people* see as quite into rights loudly praised her character, but I can't recall her talking to women much, except maybe some of the aliens might have been female, so that's Star Trek gone.
ST in it's various forms look remarkably feminist (usually) women commanded warships in ST long before the US Navy let them, they are engineers, scientists, doctors and of course inexplicable nexus of unknown forces.
Ripley from Alien, Aliens, Alien3, Return of the Alien, The Alien strikes back, Alien Resuscitation. Smart, hard, no bimbo, the Aliens are apparently female, she kills them, conversation with them is rare. The men are a) weak, b) stupid, c) dishonest, d) weak, stupid and dishonest
X-Files : Scully is smart and hardly ever talks to women.
Agents of SHIELD: Loads of women programming, analysing and occasionally shooting at people. The inter-female dialog is rare.
Babylon 5: Strong women, being heads of security, scientists, highly cultured aliens.
Torchwood : Strong female lead, again almost no inter-female dialog.
Under the Dome : The main character is a strong woman, all the weak bad people are men
Terminator 1,2,3, Sarah Connor : Oh look ! what a surprise a strong woman in a world of defective men
I've not yet seen Interstellar, but let me guess, the women in it are smart and honest and whoever is screwing things up is a man ?
I can't be the only person who's noticed that in many SciFi and action films a dumb American male is accompanied by a highly educated woman who actually understands what is going on, whilst he shoots at it.
Dominic Connor,Quant Headhunter
Wait, are women independent self-aware creatures fully capable of being anything and doing anything they want, or are they hothouse flowers who need rigorous and pervasive government protections (and of course ample funding) to ensure that their delicate sensibilities aren't offended by coarse language?
Maybe their message of "don't treat me as a sexual object all the time" would be more persuasive if the internet wasn't full of 8 million new pictures EVERY DAY day of ducklipped skanks' selfies of their tits, ass, or other body parts?
Hey, I DO get it: just because millions of women are ho's, doesn't ipso facto mean ALL women are ho's - that's obvious. But to then castigate men for not immediately recognizing which are which seems a wee bit unfair, no?
The boundary line is pretty fucking gray, and constantly shifting, especially when there seem to be many many women who aren't ACTUALLY ho's but want to seem like they are for the attention?
-Styopa
Welcome to double standards. It's OK for women to be sexist. Nobody is going after entertainment women enjoy like fashion gossip magazines, and trashy novels where men physically and mentally abuse women.
What's frightening about your comment is that it's hard to tell if you're joking or not.
The same country which classified Dead or Alive as Child Pornography?
based on whether or not the games' portrayals of women are sexist.
Sexism only works one way?
But this is ignored. For example , sure, more women suffer from anorexya than men, or more women are abused. But in both case, you will have far far far more problem getting any help whatsoever as man than as a woman.
Ask yourself : at which point ignoring a problem that both men and women have, but simply pretending it is a problem which impact primary women, may be allowed to be used as an excuse to utterly ignore the fact it also impact men ? Because essentially this is what you are doing.
In a fair unsexist world, the service to protect men and women would be existing and made available and promoted to both. And yet society still put men in a bad position to use those service, "weakling" "effiminate" etc...
I contend that sexism hurt both men and women, and it might not be anymore such a huge difference as you think, at least in western europe/American societies.
And this sexist rating being on women only, is another example. What would be the cost to expand to men negative stereotypical beefcake ? Nothing. And yet only women are considered when speaking of sexism.
And Wayland.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
I'm not really sure basing your criteria on a setup to a joke in a comic strip is the best mechanism. Epecially since it's a test that Run Lola Run, and Gravity both fail, and Flash Gordon and Twilight both pass.
Since any portrayal whatsoever of women, or no portrayal at all, can be deemed "sexist", and that same portrayal or lack of portrayal can be deemed "not sexist", depending entirely on who made the game, it will be a very simple rating -- 100% sexist if made by a man or a woman who is not a third-wave feminist. 0% sexist if made by exclusively by third-wave feminists.
systemd has the 'd' obviously sexists. therefore we need a government grant to see if we can have some sort of metadata on the sexist naming scheme of its internal components. No wonder women stay away from STEM... everything is named so sexist. "systemd"? more like systemOnlyForMen.
Women aren't a "minority," if you're hung up on definitions. You can call it sexism, patriarchy, or whatever, but "harmful sex-based preconceptions" affect men in the United States as well. As one earlier poster pointed out, it's disingenuous to suggest that sexism doesn't primarily impact women negatively, but it's also disingenuous to suggest it never negatively impacts men. Just because "you can't be sexist against men" is chanted over and over on tumblr doesn't make it fact. This is a minor quibble, but part of a larger problem. The inability of either side to accept the numerous valid points of the other is the reason for the polarization going on right now, and that polarization is far more destructive than "wasting valuable feminist time discussing men." I think the no-time-for-that strategy needs to be rethought.
But, more specifically to the topic, if realistic body image has a place in games, it should probably needs to be done for both men and women. Unless you believe no men ever have body image disorders, and that that fact can't be challenged because sweeping generalizations against men can never be sexist.
It's a real credible threat. They hate us for our freedom. Maybe we should fake some intelligence about weapons of mass destruction and invade their ass.
The market capitalization of Activision/Blizzard is $14 Billion. Take Two is $2 billion. Meanwhile someone is spending under $40K in Europe to do a study. How much impact can that possibly have?
Sweden is the Berkeley of Europe. They could ban all video games and it would make no discernible difference outside of Sweden. Just like Berkeley can pass laws on drugs or political asylum and it may or may not have any impact even inside the city limits. It's mostly posturing.
So why the freakout? It's clearly disproportionate. It gives the impression that there is a vast amount of insecurity, or maybe some unacknowledged internal guilt. It sure doesn't look like adult behavior under any circumstance,
Why is Snark Required?
As far as I know, the Swedish game industry consists of DiCE (Battlefield series: faceless men with guns + bugs. Mirror's Edge: slightly poorly thought out controls + bugs), Arrowhead (faceless mages + bugs) and Coffee Stain Studios (goats + bugs). It seems like Swedish game developers have a huge struggle against writing code that actually does what it is supposed to, not in its representation of female characters. It has gotten to the point that until you see a Swedish game in the "bargain bin" at your games retailer that it is guaranteed that won't be patched to a playable state yet.
It seems that since King Gustavus Adolphus or whoever the hell it was convinced the vikings to stop going on voyages to rape remote villages and settle down to do "civilized" work that entire country has been writing code the way that IKIA builds furniture, by which I mean that it is good for the first ten iterations and then crashes hard thereafter. I have yet to play a Swedish game that has remained stable for long enough to degrade women before it runs out of memory, reads from/writes to a null pointer, totally screws up the render state or overwrites a vertex buffer with random garbage.
Seriously, look at your supposed "retard cousin" next door Finland, does Trine crash? Does Angry Birds crash? How about Crayon Physics, Super Stardust or Clash of Clans? No, they run beautifully and smoothly. And does anyone give a shit that the Theif in Trine covers her face and not her legs? No, not even Germaine Grier, Simone de Beauvoir or any of your feminist type authors would pick a deeply nuanced female character over one that actually runs for 10 minutes without crashing. I mean, how could you be a female role model while accessing a null pointer.
Seriously Sweden, you have to learn to code before you get all preachy on us all.
When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
Leisure Suit Larry.
Bazinga.
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
PC gaming used to mean that it was played on computers as opposed to consoles. Now PC gaming has taken on a whole new meaning...
to all forms of entertainment? I'm pretty sure Anita Sarkeesian would have no trouble picking out all the rape scenes and victimized women on HBO and making an argument that HBO is misogynist.
Movies have a much greater cultural impact than video games. Shouldn't sexism factor into MPAA rating then?
Would you like a pony with that, too?
I write sci-fi for metalheads
It's your kind of post they would target instead. Fortunately, those in Gamergate care about stopping shitty behavior on both sides.
Yes, I know you're (at least half) kidding.
all this anti-CIS rage has got to go somewhere, right? let's confuse kids about their sexuality, just like every person I've met from Switzerland.
Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
But what does Bennett have to say?
I remember a few years ago seeing the 1960s Canadian TV series Wojeck, and it carried a viewer discretion warning that the standards for personal and professional relationships had changed since the program was produced. There was a certain element of "like, duh!", but somebody had thought about it, and I had no problem with it.
Fast forward to the present day. I'm watching Swedish sci-fi show Äcta Människor ("Real Humans" in English). It quietly avoids any gratuitous sex or violence, but there is lots of non-gratuitous sex and violence, as integral parts of the plot. Like all Scandinavian shows it has interesting female characters who do in fact talk to each other about something other than men. That's the sort of culture they want, it's one I admire, and I'm cool with it.
...laura
Some people would say the Tomb Raider games are sexist, because of the way Lara Croft is modeled. But she's a strong, indepedent, intelligent, and very capable individual. I think she's a great role model for my 12-year-old daughter. If I buy the next Tomb Raider game for her, will I be labeled sexist?
And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
The things you mention should be covered in gaming review sites. Now maybe you think the magazines should just list these elements as well, but here is the situation, my 8 or 10 year old has requested I buy some innocuous sounding racing game. I’m at the store, I but it. We get it home and there are big busted ladies jumping around and possibly occasionally losing their tops.
Now you may have decided I’m a prude and that it’s OK for my 8 or 10 year to see these things, but really that isn’t your call. I didn’t ask for censorship, I just asked for informative labeling on the product similar to food.
How to achieve that fair labeling may be neigh-on-impossible, but there is nothing I see wrong with the goal.
Of course you may worry that if these elements are labeled then people like me might hurt sales of games with titillating sex and violence thus making for fewer of these available – because a pretty good number of Slashdotters think people should be mature enough to handle nudity, sex, and violence at all ages and that parents isolate their children too much, or that the parents should invest time researching a game before buying (which I concede to some small degree as a fair point). Still I would contend we should make it easier for people to make informed decisions, especially parents.
Letter To Iran
A private entity cannot enforce anything upon the populace...
Care to place a wager on that? Private enterprises force things on the public all the time. Sometimes with the blessing of government, sometimes without. Government can override a private enterprise but in the absence of government action private entities can largely do whatever they want. If they are powerful they can even influence government to do their bidding at times. See regulatory capture.
Government has a very limited range of things that they do as well or better than the public at large (war/defense, money, basic law enforcement, etc) - governmental action beyond that range invariably becomes incompetent, expensive, dangerous, or worse.
The range of things government does competently is a fair bit wider than most people give credit for. There is some truth in what you say but government is often the least worst way to do quite a lot of things. Health care, social safety nets, infrastructure, contracts enforcement, basic research funding, and more are often better handled by governments than private enterprise. Furthermore just because some people in the US have an apparently allergy against government doing anything doesn't mean they are correct in their assertion that government is always bad. Lots of countries utilize governments for much more than the US does (notably for health care) with great success. Doesn't mean we have to do it that way but just because we don't do something a certain way doesn't mean it cannot be done. I'm not overly trusting of government myself but I also don't axiomatically assume government to be incompetent.
Never give government more power than the worst-case scenario you would be willing to live under.
That I would agree with. The problem is that we may have an honest disagreement about what constitutes a worst case scenario. Ask a libertarian or a conservative or a democrat and you'll generally get rather different answers.
So your point is you would ignore the list, so it shouldn't be available to anyone? Or because you think people like parents who may not agree with your stance on violence might use it -- again removing their role as a parent, because evidently gamers in the Slashdot community know better.
I could have thought I specifically said as long as it is not censorship. So why bring in Australia's practices to this discussion? Rating will lead to censorship? Not sure that follows.
Letter To Iran
Traditional, majority sexual orientation is now a "stereotype"? And the solution is to disproportionately represent alternative lifestyles?
SPOILER ALERT
I saw Interstellar, and there are two main female characters. One is one of the greatest geniuses in human history, and the other one is equally as stupid as the men on her mission - she actually causes a huge mistake that wastes decades. They don't talk to each other, so it too would fail.
I went to the article just to make sure the quote was accurate and sure enough the first sentence is
A government-funded innovation agency in Sweden is considering creating specials label for video games based on whether or not the games’ portrayals of women are sexist.
This is an anti-male suggestion and therefore, as a feminist, I oppose it. The sexes are equal and to have a special label discussing attitudes toward only one sex is... well... sexist.
If you label as sexist every video game where a man is portrayed as a strapping, burly attractive male, then I will assent to labeling as sexist every video game where a woman is portrayed as a curvy, skin-showing attractive female. Otherwise, not.
To me it is unsurprising and unremarkable that people in media are portrayed as attractive. For some other people that is offensive, but I'm not really offended.
Oh, in GTA you can rape and murder a female prostitute? Well, I've never played the game, but don't you also rob and murder male competitors? If so, then no you don't get to say one is sexist and the other isn't. Maybe you could pick out the sexual nature of the violence and say that applying that to only one sex makes a difference. If so, then the GTA people will probably just add male prostitutes for you to rape and murder -- would that satisfy the haters?
It's because of bigots like you that guys like me feel feminism still needs to exist. Same goes for affirmative action.
The simple rule is to treat others as you'd want to be treated. Period. How often do you hear about women having too much power? Never by sane people. How many females are on boards of directors? Way too few. Do women have way more obstacles to overcome just to do well at work? You bet your ass they do. Of course men "don't talk and bitch about it" because they have no idea how poorly women can be treated.
I know women to this day who are seen more as sex objects than colleagues and never taken seriously at work, even though they happen to be smarter than many of the others in the room. They are often ignored or 'mansplained to' (Wikipedia). Women (and men) actually ARE doing something productive about it by informing the ignorant that women generally have it rougher than men.
As for life being unfair, I agree with you, but not with the word 'sometimes'. Being a woman on earth means 'almost every time' life is unfair, and I don't see why that should be the status quo nor why we shouldn't set a high standard of conduct for ourselves to resolve that.
By the way, why is calling a locker room full of guys 'ladies' or something based on the feminine like 'bitching' derogatory , while telling women to 'man up' supposed to mean to strive for better?
I don't see why the burden of action should be on those who are subjugated to unfair behaviour. Why isn't it up to men to stop being jerks?
What? I can't assume Occam's Razor was a slick fold-up scooter?
Actually, not counterproductive - but productive. Easy profits. Just like "banned in Boston".
"Warning: Game may contain images of big-breasted women in tight, skimpy outfits."
Let the market decide indeed!
rofl I've seen more bellyaching from men about never talking about sexism against men than anything else over the past year. Men are the biggest bunch of whiny babies - everything has to be about them.
From now on, all computer games for distribution in the Swedish market will feature two women, Lina and Anneli, talking to each other about something other than men. Perhaps they can follow you around in GTA commenting on and discussing your actions from a critical feminism perspective?
Or informative... or pathetic... I'm not quite sure which - I don't play that many Swedish games (which, according to the PP, might be a good thing).
That is all.
I guess a game such as Crusader Kings II is going to be rated as very sexist. Darn, no woman pope or head of a holy knights order. How sexist! :)
You mean satanist, right? The 'd' stands for daemon.
As long as a game still gets rated sexist every time there is a muscular stud of a male as well.
Typical Swedeism.
People who want the 'd' are satanists. People who have the 'd' are sexist.
I don't think a blanket classification works. I mean, there is sexism in real life. Should we write the games such that there is no sexism in an effort to improve society? Is it the game makers responsibility to mold reality for the better, or is it okay that they reflect reality?
What if it is a game modeling an area of life where sexism is rampant?
If people are really offended by the sexism wouldn't they just not buy the game and thus force the game maker to reevaluate their product?
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
In this movie:
"True love's kiss" comes only from a mother to her daughter.
Kisses from men are either deceptive or powerless.
Men are power-hungry selfish and evil beings who will "clip your wings" and abandon you, and try to kill you if you do anything about it.
The only good man is one who is completely submissive and obedient to women.
It seems rather innocuous, but introducing a system of "ratings" on what are essentially political grounds seems somewhat disturbing. If we want a ratings panel to rate information based on its political content, why not also include ratings about "[promotes/opposes] gay rights", "advocates social welfare", "anti-war", etc...
Most people interact with women on a daily basis. Those real-world interactions are going to be far more impactful of someone's opinion of women than what happens in a video game.
It is not Hollywood's fault that hot women tend not to cultivate their intellectual abilities. Women reinforce these stereotypes when they live them. If you want to strike against the stereotype, then ramp up efforts to encourage women to value intellectual achievement above appearance, and to value business success above relationship success. As more and more women live according to those values, perceptions of women will change.
The process is slow, of course, but labeling a video game sexist for pandering to the already-established stereotypes won't actually change those stereotypes.
Star Trek Voyager: Say what you will about the series as a whole (admittedly having problems whose root cause starts with the words "Brannon" and "Braga"), but Janeway generally had the respect of her crew, spoke to the other female characters about whatever the relevant topic was (engineering, Seven of Nine's character development, etc.), and ultimately got her crew home.
Mass Effect: FemShep does her thing the same way male Shepard does, by diplomacy, by 'bigger gun diplomacy', or both. She speaks to whoever she wants, however she wants, and gains the respect of virtually everyone she crosses paths with...ironically, most anti-Shepard sentiment is based upon her being a human, not her being a female.
Metroid: you kick butt the entire game and THEN find out that Samus is a girl.
Clearly not an exhausive list, but off the top of my head, there ARE examples of strong female protagonists that aren't vapid caricatures.
"Historically accurate" is going to be mutually exclusive with all your other points unless the game is set in the future.
I'm sure other Swedish media like TV and movies have a lack of female characters portrayed as the primary agents of action in their storylines. I would also bet that there is far more female nudity on display in these media than male. To be fair these forms of sexism should also be stamped out.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
So where would the following games fall on such a scale?
Cooking mama
Halo Reach
Animal Crossing
Metroid Prime
Different people will always care about different things. That's why the official "ratings" board's job should be to make objective descriptions of pieces of media (games, movies, whatever) and provide them to different groups which produce their own ratings. Then you get your ratings from whoever, but the information they're basing their ratings on is always the same — or you'll want to know why.
I, personally, would prefer to avoid movies with a lot of vomiting in them, because that puts me off my popcorn. I think there's room for a lot of different ratings systems, but I see the need for standardization. This option provides for both.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Also known as "being an adult".
Glad there's so much concern that everyone remain infantile.
When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me.
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
and a survey by Bennett.
What! Sweden doesn't criminalize trivial things? Like maybe having sex without a condom....ask Julian Assange how that worked out for him. Oh wait, you can't because he's in hiding.
What if the portrayal of men is sexist?
What if the men are all given big muscles and brawny attitudes.
That is sexist because not all men are like that.
What about the incredibly low number of games where the hero is trans-gender?
You can't have a rating system for sexism, that only rates how sexist it is against women, that would be intentionally excluding men, and would therefore be sexist.
Why not just make looking in the direction of a female a criminal offense?
Let's see you sell them games as "free of any sexy", "does not contain sexy", or the R rated "may contain traces of sexy".
Why does this make me imagine the voice of the teenage son Steve from "American Dad"?
Also, obligatory paraphrasing here:-
Sexism = Sexy these days
Ian Publisher: Sweden is gonna give the game an "R" rating... because they have decided that it is sexist.
Nigel G Amergate: Well, so what? What's wrong with bein' sexy? I mean there's no...
Ian Publisher: Sex-IST!
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
Satan? Daemon?
Monster drinks are go!
I doubt seriously if you talk to any women at all that are functional and successful in society.
As long as we see ratings applied to Duke and other games with unfair body image males perpetuating stereotypical male things (killing people). I fucking doubt it though. Ripped dude who can probably bench 400lbs in a loin cloth with a pretty girl in bikini. Sexism! Unfair body image for women with slutty clothing! Grab your pitchforks lets go get 'em!
Is the article saying that all the videogames that will be censored, changed or otherwise destroyed by feminists, expecially after the gamergate media lynching of opposition, will be labeled as "feminism approved"?
I think that's a good news in a certain way.
... and music... and media of all kinds. And then admit that what you've really been doing all along is just censorship.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
Hi guys,
I hope you won't consider it trolling as I'm being honest, I swear.
In ancient Greece they had gorgeous sculptures (paintings too?) of gods all over the place (and oh god, creating those sculptures was a monumental effort), were they objectifying them?
USSR had pictures/photos/sculptures of Lenin/Stalin/Whoeverisinpower all over the place, was it because they were objectifying them?
North Korean leaders sculptures/paintings all over the place, because they objectify them?
I think not. I'm pretty sure all things above happen(ed) because people were/are WORSHIPING them.
Now tell me why it is different with the beauty of an attractive human body. Why is it objectifying and not worshiping?
Let's establish some biologic facts. All life's primary purpose is to reproduce. All our emotions and desires are optimized for our survival and reproduction. Men and women reproduce very differently. A women is only fertile for a relatively short period of time, and invests far more in the offspring, biologically speaking. Men are fertile their entire life, and invest very little. Sperm is a lot cheaper than eggs. Women need to be more selective with whom they copulate with, men don't, so the genders behave very differently. This imbalance of sexual value is the reason why sexual reproduction is so effective. It wouldn't work if men and women behaved the same way! Now we've established that men and women reproduce with vastly different parameters, and can say that a difference in behavior when it comes to copulation is to be expected. We observe that women tend to be more attracted to personality. Humor, social skills, leadership qualities, social status, popularity etc. Men are attracted to features that correlate with fertility. What makes a woman sexy is very different from what makes a man sexy. Feminism contends that this difference is the result of societal constructs, and needs to be fixed by injecting their ideology into our culture, when in fact it's the result of being a sexually reproducing species, and can't be "fixed" by altering peoples attitudes. This is why they cling to the outdated and thoroughly disproved idea of tabula rasa, the blank slate, under which everything can be "fixed". I get the impression that to be attracted to a woman's body alone, IE wanting to sleep with a woman just because she looks good, is considered wrong and objectification. By extension behaving as a heterosexual male is wrong, and needs to be "fixed".
I honestly don't see a problem with sexualising female characters in video games, esp. in games which the male fanbase is going to be the predominant buyer.
Probably because they don't exist.
And there's no evidence to say that it'll lead to the sexualising of real women, like how there's been virtually no evidence over the last few decades with first person shooting games creating murderers and serial killers.
I enjoy seeing anime and video game characters naked and or in sexual situations, but when it comes to real women, I have no interest in them; sexual or otherwise.
However, I do treat them with curteousy and respect.
What this really boils down to is antiquated victorian prudery (like with that guy's shirt a few days ago.), "I don't like it, so ban it!"
I could just as easily bitch about Duke Nukem unfairly portraying guys as ripped, loaded and idolized by women, but I don't, because I know he isn't real.
This is already present, it's called cover art. If cover art is half naked girl, or not, there is your sexism rating.
I've seen the "isms require systemic power structure" argument before, but it's wrong. That's only one of the definitions in the dictionary, and it's not the first one. Moreover, in some areas (justice system, parental leave) there is a systemic power structure in favor of women.
As to the pay gap, once you adjust for career choices, hours worked, and years of experience, it nearly vanishes. Combine that with the documented trend for women to ask for raises less often than men, and the fact that paid maternal leave in the absence of paid paternal leave (much more common than the other way around, or even parity) should be counted as extra payment, and it's actually gone.
This is clearly an agenda based study which aims to make a "case in point" by claiming to be a government study which the people need. There is a need to study which ratings are felt by the public as neglected. The ratings system is missing information like Blasphemy. This is made clear through Hollywood's readiness to replace common profanity with less offending terms such as: "Goddamn" and "Jesus Christ".
He is crazy if you think about it; I am not.
Fuck yeah, creepercards for games!
Its important to know what your buying. // I know a guy, he didn't know what softcore porn was. He actually thought it was average, i.e. the same kind of content that Lion king had. The example here is Freezing - the anime(ecchi). He didn't realise it was adult content material, he thought it rated the same as 'teen'. When I explained to him, he then noticed the differences. // This is because games, movies, books, anything another human creates has an effect on other peoples mindset - especially children - especially young adults. // If parents buy things for their kids that they don't know what it has in it, it can have disastrous consequences. Same as if teens buy things they don't know what it has in. // This problem - feminism-humanisn-sexism - whatever you want to call it - goes so deep, I don't think it is entirely irreversible. I believe the best way forward is to be informed about humanism/feminism/sexism in regard to both male and females, gender equality. Properly research it - don't just read what you want to hear. //
One good one to research the views on would be Bayonetta. //
I don't like imposing my views on other people - even though I know how much sense I make ;) but read up these links on this topic: //
http://gomakemeasandwich.wordp...
http://www.newstatesman.com/cu...
There is a difference between a game depicting some reality where there is sexism, and a game made by sexist people who promote sexism.
That's why the sexism rating should be two ratings:
One rating for how much sexist clichés there are in the game, has there are in real life.
One rating for how much the game could induce sexist behavior, as it may be done on purpose by sexist people.
(this late posting is more a note to myself...)