Retreading "feminism"
It is not surprising that people within an MMORPG do not understand male sexuality.
|
Women are clearly more sexualized in this game than men are. One need only look at the costume options to see that.
Attractive != sexualized. Physically idealized != sexualized.
What is nice, though, is that female characters are not locked into it as they are in some other games. And it's possible to bring that aspect into a male character as well, which is rare. I appreciate that.
But if you think that men and women are equally sexualized in this game, well... I'm afraid there's something you're not getting.
Frankly, I'm baffled it's even being debated.
The Cape Radio: You're not super until you put on the Cape!
DJ Enigma's Puzzle Factory: Co* Parody Commercials
The Cape Radio: You're not super until you put on the Cape!
DJ Enigma's Puzzle Factory: Co* Parody Commercials
If you're a player who would never use these options (and from looking at most characters out there, most wouldn't) would you want them using up all their time on this?
|
I want developers to work on all sorts of things, even if I'm not personally interested in them. Because that expands the playerbase, which in turn makes the game more successful, which is good for me and everyone else playing it.
That aside, I don't think expanding character design options is ever a bad thing, because it contributes to character uniqueness, and I think just about everyone appreciates that. Even if you don't use a particular option, someone else will, which further distinguishes them from you.
The Cape Radio: You're not super until you put on the Cape!
DJ Enigma's Puzzle Factory: Co* Parody Commercials
Well think of it from a player standpoint.
If you're a player who would never use these options (and from looking at most characters out there, most wouldn't) would you want them using up all their time on this? I wouldn't. With the new costume pieces, I can see many people using them! Okay Cyborg pack seems to not get much use. But generally, those pieces get used. Those new sliders/models...not as likely. |
However, asking me if I'd like them working on those things (or things I'm not interested in, but others may be)... I think that these types of options add to all users' experiences, because the options they don't use, they get to see from/on others.
I'm not entirely normal though (so I'm really not against your point), but I would like them to work on such things, even though I don't think I'd actually make fat characters nor huge females (I might, but I certainly don't have any in mind at present time, yet I still get excited at the idea of them adding such things).
and round up everyone that knows more than they do"-Dylan
Aren't the same poses that the stereotypical male hero takes to look 'manly' the very poses that theoretically (by Golden Age standards) are sexually attractive to straight women?
Maybe the men are sexualized as much as the women and we aren't seeing it.
Regardless, and more to the point:
More costume options for everyone!
Story Arcs I created:
Every Rose: (#17702) Villainous vs Legacy Chain. Forget Arachnos, join the CoT!
Cosplay Madness!: (#3643) Neutral vs Custom Foes. Heroes at a pop culture convention!
Kiss Hello Goodbye: (#156389) Heroic vs Custom Foes. Film Noir/Hardboiled detective adventure!
It's funny to find this topic here, because I just finished a blog post about the sad state of Sister Psyche.
Out of all the canonical female characters in game, she gets it the worse, especially static art.
As far as costume lock outs go, there is no reason for female characters not to have the Baron Coat. Or the skull mask. Or the Resistance helmet. Or anything really.
@Arwen Darkblade
Proud Member of Hammer of the Gods and Sanguine Syndicate
Arc ID #86194 "Cry Havoc"
Arc ID #103934 "Dr. Thomas' First Day"
[URL="http://tobyfife.blogspot.com/"]Hero Girl[/URL] - my geek culture blog
Aren't the same poses that the stereotypical male hero takes to look 'manly' the very poses that theoretically (by Golden Age standards) are sexually attractive to straight women?
|
Sexualization is what happens to a female character's chest when the Witch Top is donned. Is there any costume option that makes a man's crotch bulge or makes it look like he's got a banana in his pantleg? No.
Female characters in the canon who are sexualized: Desdemona, Dominatrix, Sister Psyche, Silver Mantis, Bob Cat, Mother Mayhem, Vanessa DeVore.
Male characters in the canon who are sexualized: ...can't think of one.
Ghost Widow hasn't been sexualized. Honestly, I think that's contributed to her popularity. Note, many people still find her sexy. Sexy and sexualized aren't the same thing.
I recently saw Appleseed: Ex Machina. Deunan Knute is a good example of a sexy and strong female character who hasn't been sexualized.
The Cape Radio: You're not super until you put on the Cape!
DJ Enigma's Puzzle Factory: Co* Parody Commercials
A lot of interesting commentary on the thread. I know we're not supposed to go to larger cultural context, but I feel that it needs to be said anyway.
This is a video game and I guess it could be argued that the primary audience for most things we consider video games (MMO's, Xbox/PS3 games etc, so disregarding things like Farmville and the weird Google Earth game my sister likes to play) to be targeted primarily at men. I might be wrong in that - and CoH certainly has a huge community of women (which is nothing short of awesome). I have worked in various ways in the film industry, and have taken a boat load of classes about film theory; one of the big terms that was spoken about was the "male gaze" - essentially it means this: most directors, writers and producers are overwhelmingly men in the field of Hollywood, and so their portrayal of women is generally seen as only viewed through the eyes of men. Any time a woman is sexualized or objectified it is then considered to be the product primarily of that male gaze. Interestingly enough the primary consumer of television and movies are women - I can't remember the actual statistical breakdowns but it is substantial. So while women are objectified through men's eyes, the primary consumer of that objectification (disregarding the adult film industry, which would necessarily be a bad argument to make) aren't men. It's women. And it's women who give the tacit approval for most of those objectifications (whether it's sexuality or the dumb blonde, or the Bond girl of the moment running around boobs-a-shaking[speaking of which I just watched Thunderball - Claudine Auger is very pleasing to the eye). What's most interesting is that the objectification of women is an easy target, but if you watch, say, the Bond films, there is very little argument that can be made that Bond is not also hyper sexualized. Also related - how often does Brad Pitt have his shirt off in Troy while apparently oiled up? How often was Robert Downey Jr. sexualized in Iron Man? For some reason we tend to ignore those objectifications when it's targeted towards men, but if it's toxic for women, it's just as toxic for men. Or do you not think that men tend to adhere to some weird male machismo stereotype that's pervasive? Certainly this game does.
Ultimately though, I think it does come down to there should be more options to play different looking characters in this game. And maybe this game is necessarily a bad place to look since it's playing off the comic book genre where everyone, including the men, are hyper sexualized and caricatured. Or do you think that if a man walked around in skin tight clothes in Real life they would possibly ever look that good?
EDIT: I guess my bigger point is this: I don't think objectification is bad. Were I a woman (or a gay man) I would certainly appreciate Brad Pitt without his shirt in Troy. I certainly enjoyed watching Claudine Auger in Thunderball (and Monica Bellucci in everything and anything). Objectification is bad though when that's all there is. I think that that is Sam's bigger point - sexual objectification of women in character creator options tends to overwhelm many other options for women. I would argue though that the same is true for the male models, we just don't necessarily see it as readily because male sexualization is, for one reason or another, not considered a bad thing.
"Be a beacon?"
Blue Mourning: lvl. 50 Katana/DA
Bree the Barricade: lvl 50 Stone/Axe
Last Chance for Eden: lvl 50 Fire/Kin
Myra the Grey: lvl 50 Bots/Traps
1 Minute to Midnight lvl 50 Spines/DA
Goodbye may seem forever
Farewell is like the end
But in my heart's the memory
And there you'll always be
-- The Fox and the Hound
That "tacit approval" of which you speak is because whenever women speak up, we are silenced with cries of "taking it too far" or being *******. So we end up talking among ourselves and preaching to the choir and not getting anywhere. For many women this is exhausting, so they just accept defeat and move on.
Yes, comic men are exaggerated to often ridiculous degrees. But it's different in the sense that the sexualization of men comes with the notion (either implied or overt) that they are also highly capable. The sexualization of women usually comes with enfantilization and the notion (either implied or overt) that we are feeble and need men to help us. So we're not only being degraded as just a sexual object, but we're having our capability and intelligence degraded as well. Furthermore, women's bodies are used to sell and promote nearly every product you can imagine from candy bars to sports cars.
@Arwen Darkblade
Proud Member of Hammer of the Gods and Sanguine Syndicate
Arc ID #86194 "Cry Havoc"
Arc ID #103934 "Dr. Thomas' First Day"
[URL="http://tobyfife.blogspot.com/"]Hero Girl[/URL] - my geek culture blog
That "tacit approval" of which you speak is because whenever women speak up, we are silenced with cries of "taking it too far" or being *******. So we end up talking among ourselves and preaching to the choir and not getting anywhere. For many women this is exhausting, so they just accept defeat and move on.
Yes, comic men are exaggerated to often ridiculous degrees. But it's different in the sense that the sexualization of men comes with the notion (either implied or overt) that they are also highly capable. The sexualization of women usually comes with enfantilization and the notion (either implied or overt) that we are feeble and need men to help us. So we're not only being degraded as just a sexual object, but we're having our capability and intelligence degraded as well. Furthermore, women's bodies are used to sell and promote nearly every product you can imagine from candy bars to sports cars. |
There is a culture of defiance that has grown over the last hundred years or so, but, at least to some extent, women have brought in, and have for the purposes of our culture, always brought into the process. If these films didn't sell because women as a whole group, found them offensive, I promise you they'd stop making those films because they'd stop making money.
"Be a beacon?"
Blue Mourning: lvl. 50 Katana/DA
Bree the Barricade: lvl 50 Stone/Axe
Last Chance for Eden: lvl 50 Fire/Kin
Myra the Grey: lvl 50 Bots/Traps
1 Minute to Midnight lvl 50 Spines/DA
If these films didn't sell because women as a whole group, found them offensive, I promise you they'd stop making those films because they'd stop making money.
|
And this is why sexism is bad for both women and men. The same culture that thinks female super heroes can (and should and want to) fight crime in stilettos is the same culture that says men should like football, beer, and boobs. There are many different ways to be feminine and masculine, a good number of which overlap. But when we hold up just one of each as *this* is feminine, and *this* is masculine, we limit ourselves and stunt our emotional growth and maturity.
As for why the Valentino films were popular among women, I have no idea. I have not seen them so I have no frame of reference. My best guess is that women looked past what was happening on the screen and just saw a very attractive man in a seemingly romantic situation and were wishing they could be that woman. It's the same reason some women are all about Johnny Depp as Jack Sparrow, despite the fact that he's a criminal with appalling oral hygiene.
But it's also why some guys like Megan Fox despite the fact that she can't act and has soulless eyes. We have set up in our society that there is only one way to be attractive, and both Mr. Depp and Ms. Fox fit that bill (for many people at least). When you're bombarded from an early age with imagines of what you're supposed to find attractive, you start believing it.
Ever have a friend who was attracted to larger women? And was embarrassed by it? Same principle.
And I'll stop here before I tangent again. >.>
@Arwen Darkblade
Proud Member of Hammer of the Gods and Sanguine Syndicate
Arc ID #86194 "Cry Havoc"
Arc ID #103934 "Dr. Thomas' First Day"
[URL="http://tobyfife.blogspot.com/"]Hero Girl[/URL] - my geek culture blog
The running motion for women annoys me. It's the reason why I only have one female character. It's the reason why I haven't finished Dragon Age II. I don't like the look of the male running animation, but the female one physically irritates me. That definitely needs to be changed, along with the "omg my nails are drying" flying stance. That is my opinion on the matter.
![](http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/9729/loyalistsig6.png)
Bad Voodoo by @Beyond Reach. Arc ID #373659. Level 20-24. Mr. Bocor has fallen victim to a group of hooded vigilantes who have been plaguing Port Oakes, interfering with illegal operations and pacifying villain's powers. He demands that revenge is taken on these miscreants and his powers are returned! You look like just the villain for the job. Challenging.
My issue is with the concept of feminism in games and in life in general is that it has been taken from the point of a MAN and not from a woman. In comics that has been the way it is for a long time, and life in general feminism can mean good things, but now yields almost a stigma of being negative.
While female characters can be what ever you wish them, masculine traits are not considdered attractive socially, as in many cases neither is a feminine male concept, although both are gaining traction of acceptance, but will always generally have a social stigma attatched to them.
Much like BrandX some of my favorite toons are wearing three costume parts. A top, battle panties and thigh high boots. Stripper? Tramp? or just the common perception of thematic females in comic books, which show skin, but can hardly be considdered weak or flimsy in the way of personality, and can be the backbone of a super group. Although many times female characters in comics will remain second string, or love interests.
Feminism does not mean that I as a female can't wish to turn heads, wear skimpy things or in the alternate bulk up like Hulk Hogan! I don't have to hide my feminine body to be a feminist. In fact a large part of the feminist movement was for equality, control of our sexual reproductive rights and the ability to function in society amonsgt men. However that that does not mean we lose or should lose our sexulity and sensuality in the process.
I call this the chain-mail bikini concept (those of you who know of the CMB will understand) "Ill have your AC baby, because apparently my breasts are my only vulnerability!"
Some woman will want to dress in skimpy things. Victoria Secret proves that we still like to be soft, pretty, and feel sexy. Thats called hunting for a mate! But we also do it for ourselves as well. It does not mean that woman do not want to be strong, powerful and self reliant.
As for the titan weapons and musculature, I think much of it comes biologicly as well as through social environmental that woman lose gender idenity depending on how they look, however that does not really have anything to do with feminist equality, that has to do with with gender identity and sexual physical markers.
Overall the point I am making is that making something soft or pretty, or something masculine and hard, does not make this a feminist issue, it makes it an issue of gender role, and considdering this is a game of extremes, people will "over play" their personaly traits through the physical appearence of of their avatar, which can draw a negative reaction.
An overplayed Feminist, is equally bad as an overlyplayed Demon, Cat-Person, Demi-God etc. The difference is that one is political and often times confused.
My own theory is that the subtle pressure at work here is boys grow up in a social dynamic where you're not supposed to care about what other people think about you, or at least *pretend* not to care. Girls are brought up in a social dynamic of fitting into groups. It is that small opportunity that allows peer pressure to slip in at a very early age and start influencing girls to care far more about how other girls judge how they look, how they act, and how they think, than for boys, and it leaks into the larger culture of appearance and body image.
|
Anyway, because I spent most of my time around the girls in my class, I did see a lot of what you're describing going on, though mostly as a bystander. It often surprised me how vicious and biting high-school girls could be just among each other something as simple as "those shoes don't go with those pants." You watch dreck like Totally Spies and think that can't happen... But it can. I never really thought about it this way, but "other women" do indeed seem to be women's harshest critics by far.
Speaking as a guy and from knowing other guys, "guys aren't that fussy." In fact, I'd go as far as to say that guys tend to be very generous, ignoring aspects of woman they find attractive, but focusing on the aspects that they do. Perhaps this is an expression of being shallower and possibly a disrespect for women in general by seeing them as a collection of "parts" rather than as a whole person, but in some ways it leads to a much more easygoing attitude. So what if those shoes don't go with those pants? The shirt is still very nice, so that's good, right?
I guess there's an argument here between judging people based on aspects of their whole, or trying to look past superficial aspects and judge people as a whole person, and where objectification comes from the former. Consider a costume-obsessed City of Heroes player (i.e. me), and what said player thinks when seeing a cool costume: "I want to use those shoulders!" "I want that hat!" "I didn't think those boots could look like this!" It's very rare, I think, that we'll look at an NPC with a costume we like and think "Wow, this is a good overall design, even though I don't like any of the pieces." We see a costume we like because it has pieces we want, or because it has an idea we like. When we see a costume we like, we don't see the NPC as a better person for having it, we see the NPC as a foam mannequin that the costume is stretched over.
I don't think City of Heroes can ever escape this kind of objectification. The costume editor teaches up to treat people as collections of parts, so when we see a costume we like or one we dislike, our heads break it down into its component parts and tells us which parts we think were used well and which parts weren't. Take, for instance, the Resistance-looking Magiacl Armour dudes from the Carnival of War - they look AMAZING for almost their entire body, EXCEPT those god damn Banded boots. They stand out, they look bad and they have no place to be on an otherwise great costume, but they are.
I should probably save the rest of that line of thought for a later quote
![Smile](images/smilies/smile.gif)
I was reading an article the other day in Wired magazine about caricatures, and it reminded me that human brains seem to have evolved to "norm" the notion of what people look like, and "attractiveness" seems to be related to how a particular person compares to an "average" face that the brain builds up over time. The stronger that average model is, the stronger the sense of relative attractiveness when compared to other faces.
|
Now, of course, I still find some things more attractive than others, but the ones I enjoy the most are the things that deviate from that norm the most while still remaining attractive. Speaking of female faces specifically, I like a pretty face as much as the next guy and dislike a disfigured face just instinctively. And yet, some of the coolest faces I've seen were the ones with the huge scars and giant stitches when I or others have been able to make them work. Pushing the boundaries of norms while still remaining tasteful is where I find the greatest aesthetic fulfilment. Restricting ourselves to said norms is just... Boring. Boring, because we can do so much more.
Given that the parameters for attractiveness, athleticism, and heroism have a lot of overlap (as defined by the framing culture etc etc), how can you tell the difference between a male character who acquires attractive qualities as a side effect of having heroic qualities, and a male character who acquires heroic qualities as a side effect of having attractive qualities?
|
I like to think I've done a good job on the above because while she IS eyecandy to a large extent, I think I've done enough to "legitimise" her character as an actual person to "earn" the right to some fanservice
![Smile](images/smilies/smile.gif)
I've read and viewed many works by people who do find men attractive, and thus seen many depictions of what I can only assume are sexually idealized men. They're a varied lot, I'll say that much. Some of them do look and act like the archetypal superhero. Many others don't. So if there's something I'm not getting here, I'd appreciate you laying it out in simple terms, because I'm genuinely interested in what you have to say.
|
Male characters written by women, though sometimes just the same, are often much more diverse and much more often centre on more spiritual qualities. There are a thousand tropes just for that, sure, but the mere fact that we always assume the "tank" has to be a big dude and the healer and tiny girl is reason enough to pause and think about it. Not all men ARE big and strong. Not all men SHOULD be. Not all men, furthermore, should even WANT to be big and strong, and the ones who don't shouldn't be mocked and ridiculed. But because there exists this kind of peer pressure pushing men into that specific stereotype, that's what we see the most.
However, I don't think male characters in City of Heroes are nearly as sexualised as people think, at least judging by what people tend to make. Oh, sure, the muscular beefcake exists, but most male characters I've teamed with are robots, hooded, dragons, in power armour or still something OTHER than beefy man in skin-tight spandex. You see a few of those, sure, but by and large, people just seem to feel comfortable making them in many different shapes and forms. Compare that to female characters, whom you almost never see masked. Hell, I had to fight my own irrational instincts before I could make a fully-masked female character before I could break out of that rut.
What I'm trying to say is that men are often seen as most appealing when they look like weightlifters, but this is usually restricted to how they are perceived by other men. When female writers get involved, the range of male characters becomes much broader. I don't want to say any less objectified as that's more down to the specific writer's skill and inclination, but it's clear to me that women like more types of men than men do
![Smile](images/smilies/smile.gif)
If you're a player who would never use these options (and from looking at most characters out there, most wouldn't) would you want them using up all their time on this?
|
Only ever sticking to the themes I know I enjoy is the death knell of creativity. Pushing my own boundaries, experimenting with things I'm not familiar with and even working with things I expressly DISLIKE is where I find the game's greatest excitement. With every new character I make that I never thought I wanted to make, I feel like I've grown richer in experience, and that's something money can't really buy.
Oh, sure, there are specific things I want just because the game doesn't have them, but when it comes to costume pieces, there isn't any one single thing that I specifically DON'T want. Even things I don't like when I first see them are things I'll want to toy around with in time, just to see if I can't make a character type I don't like in a way I'll still enjoy. The only time I'll argue against adding one costume piece in favour of another is if we're looking to add to a category that already has more than enough options, whereas adding to another that has few or no options would be much better. It's always better to expand the costume creator outwardly and enable more and weirder costumes, because it enables those of us who want it to push our own boundaries and increase the breadth of characters we create.
I have no interest in making a gunslinger, for instance. I don't like Westerns in the slightest and I don't like the thematic. I'm still excited for the Gunslinger set because I wonder if I can't make a gunslinger with a weird story and a unique look that I'm going to like anyway. And I'm pretty sure I can, if I put my mind to it.
Long story short - yes, I want them to spend time making costumes I didn't ask for, provided they're not adding to an already saturated category (like tech armour).
That's not sexualization. Again, attractiveness does not equate to sexualization. There's nothing that is explicitly sexually provocative about a man looking manly. If there were, this game would have to be rated M for Mature.
|
However, I still don't think this is a bad thing. Like I said before - if said character has been written well enough to be compelling, then being objectified can be forgiven, and indeed enjoyed for what it is. The problem isn't objectification. It's poor writing confusing a pleasing appearance with a compelling character.
Ghost Widow hasn't been sexualized. Honestly, I think that's contributed to her popularity. Note, many people still find her sexy. Sexy and sexualized aren't the same thing.
|
Like all the Seers and Widows, Ghost Widow is still objectified because she's a ridiculously hot woman in skintight vinyl, but her writing "earns" her the right to that, and she pulls it off because she's a compelling character who also happens to be sexy. That's the right way to do it, I think.
Objectification is bad though when that's all there is. I think that that is Sam's bigger point - sexual objectification of women in character creator options tends to overwhelm many other options for women. I would argue though that the same is true for the male models, we just don't necessarily see it as readily because male sexualization is, for one reason or another, not considered a bad thing.
|
When objectification of characters exists as an option, this doesn't bother me. When it exists as the ONLY option, however, I have a problem with it. And right now, in City of Heroes, this exists for women a lot more so than for men for the simple fact that men have a lot more body shapes to choose from than women do. This brings me back to my previous point - men are allowed to be anything, from thin to chunky, from small to impossibly huge, from butt ugly to a fangirl's dream. Women, by contrast, are more or less limited to a fanboy's dream and not a lot else.
To the editor's credit, tools DO exist to deviate, but you have to know where to look, you have to know what to do with them and you have to pretty much hammer a square peg in a round hole to achieve this deviation, and even then you don't deviate by this much. I have at least two masculine women, at last two hideous monstrous women, at least two women with concealed faces and... Well, and so on. However, in doing this, I have pretty much run out of costume pieces, so any other unusual women I want to make have to either repeat much of the same pieces and slider options, or otherwise wait on future developments of the sort that I've been hounding David since he showed up on the forums
![Smile](images/smilies/smile.gif)
Objectification doesn't bother me when it exists in fiction. It bothers me when it's forced down onto my own characters, pretty much.
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Just to add one more thing.
Woman in our loverly game, will alway call me a male because apparently my "lady-of-ill-repute" (My boob slider is low by the way. Always low) costumes make me less of a feminist.
I say POO to them!
If being a feminist means having to MAN-UP, then that my forum friends just denotes another badly screwed concept of even a womans viewpoint of what a strong woman has to be!
The male avatars appearing strong, and the list of sexualised aesthetics they also posses, are not entirely prerequisites of one another.
|
Heh.
Yes, I'm aware most of us are tired of the subject and the flame wars that tend to erupt around it, and I'm probably not qualified to talk about it, but the issue keeps being raised I feel for a reason, both in issues new and old, and I don't think we've ever actually addressed it generally outside of the context of any specific costume set or change. The practical reason I decided to post this now instead of, you know, playing the damn game like I should be in my time off, is this:
Movie Bob's "The Big Picture" video on "Gender Games," as he puts it. Now, I'm not here to review the video itself, but there is one very specific point I want to draw from it: Poses. I consider myself an observant guy, yet for all the reasons the representation of females in modern fiction has bothered me, I've never been able to put my finger on it so specifically as "poses," and more generally the way body language characters use to communicate their personalities. Now, to many it may seem absurd that people like me would cry foul of over something as simple as women having smaller weapons or getting "barbarian" stilettos or being stuck with a running animation which emphasises butt wiggle over everything else, or having a "muscle" slider that seems to concentrate on making their breasts and buts bigger, those being famous areas of muscle mass and... Where was I going with this? Right! To some, making a big deal of any of these, or even ALL of these, may seem absurd and uncalled for, but I think there's a reason this keeps happening, and I don't think we can really blame the game or the developers for this all the way. Consider that between the costumes women get, the costumes women tend to wear AND the demeanour their animations are given... Something ain't right. But much as I want to dev-bash as I have been for a while now, I don't think I can, not without a lot of caveats. No, what strikes me every time a subject like this comes up is that actual unaffiliated players raise their voices to talk about femininity and how females SHOULD be represented as such. I don't necessarily disagree with this, but as Movie Bob says, men often get to represent a great many thing just in the way they look and act, not always even remotely related to masculinity, yet women still seem to somehow get saddled with exuding femininity before they exude anything else. Again, I'm not laying the blame on the developers in general or the art team in particular. Hell, the latest set we got - CoT - is completely homogeneous between genders. For all the other things I hate about it, at the very least it's completely fair and equal, and that counts for a lot in my eyes. However, from my eyes the bigger problem of perception still remains because for YEARS now the bulk of my cosmetic suggestions have been for women and have aimed to make them appear more "butch" as someone said a while back. Now, I "get" the technical side of the problem with these suggestions, but what I honestly don't get is the... I don't want to say "moral" but let's say that I don't get the "philosophical" disagreement with the very idea. And it IS quite a serious disagreement, I should say, because I've been called a "pervert" over it, though that's a story for another time. My point? Beyond just an idle examination of a topic I find interesting and an excuse to post an intelligent video, Titanic Weapons are coming. We don't know when, but they are. We've been promised that those would be giant for ALL genders, and that will invariably raise the question once more, possibly more so than ever before. Another poster joked about adding "Titanic Arms" to go with Titanic Weapons at my constant suggestion for Robotic Arms getting muscular human arm options, but that's kind of the point - all of these suggestions seem to be interpreted as jokes, or at best as niche appeal. Women appearing masculine, both in costume and mannerism (anyone remember the hatred for the "with weapon" run style for women?) is seen as something weird, unpopular and unnecessary for the most part, and this befuddles me. Men are allowed to cover the full spectrum of characters, right down to practically feminine, yet women representing anything other than femininity is... Niche? I really don't mean to start a fight here, and I'd really appreciate if we could approach this with civility, but I also feel that this needs to be examined in a more abstract context than JUST the Barbarian set or JUST body sliders or what have you. |
Virtue: @Santorican
![](http://i.imgur.com/dmfLZ.jpg)
Dark/Shield Build Thread
Ghost Widow hasn't been sexualized. Honestly, I think that's contributed to her popularity. Note, many people still find her sexy. Sexy and sexualized aren't the same thing.
|
Next to Sister Psyche, I'd argue she's one of the most sexualized female canon characters in game (pre-Desdemona of course).
An overplayed Feminist, is equally bad as an overlyplayed Demon, Cat-Person, Demi-God etc. The difference is that one is political and often times confused.
|
Yet where you assert that overplaying is bad, I think it's like picking fruit. The longer you can let it ripen on the plant, the more intense the flavor. But you also risk going too far and your harvest going off. But it's worth the risk IMO.
So back to what I understand as Sam's original overall topic and question that has resurfaced several times in the past year: why are there so few options to then overplay the muscle bound Red Sonja type of female in game?
I have a hard time agreeing with this statement when you look at her costume chest piece. The first thing a couple people I know who don't play the game have commented upon seeing her in game or loading graphics are her breasts. That costume isolated and exaggerates the existence of her breasts. It's all there in black and white. And personally, I've always thought that she was a bit of a cheesey character for it.
Next to Sister Psyche, I'd argue she's one of the most sexualized female canon characters in game (pre-Desdemona of course). |
However, all that being said, GW is a good example of a woman's who's sexualization is used as a tool to build character instead of it being the end point of character (Starfire from DC I'm looking at you!). GW most interesting assets aren't her boobs, or her face, or her one of a kind hair. It's the fact that they built an interesting mythology and character around those things. Her relationship with Wretch is one of the most interesting in the game. When you compare her backstory to, say, Black Scorpion's, you can see how much richer her's is, and how much better fleshed and rounded out she is as a character.
"Be a beacon?"
Blue Mourning: lvl. 50 Katana/DA
Bree the Barricade: lvl 50 Stone/Axe
Last Chance for Eden: lvl 50 Fire/Kin
Myra the Grey: lvl 50 Bots/Traps
1 Minute to Midnight lvl 50 Spines/DA
It's funny to find this topic here, because I just finished a blog post about the sad state of Sister Psyche.
Out of all the canonical female characters in game, she gets it the worse, especially static art. |
![Frown](images/smilies/frown.gif)
Thought for the day:
"Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment."
=][=
Responses in no particular order.
Oedipus_Tex: Everything you said is really interesting. I had not previously considered the idea that hyperfemininity (or hypermasculinity) is a feature of drag, but it makes sense: one needs to stack as many tells of the opposite gender as one can in order to achieve the desired effect. I'm definitely going to be looking at characters with a wider sense of possibility now.
That said, even allowing for heavy use of costuming and makeup, I'd be hard pressed to assemble a male and female rig in this game that I could believe were the same person. I'm honestly not sure how I feel about that.
Brand X: This is exactly why I could put a dollar figure on how much revenue is sitting on the table that could be CoH's if they implemented some of the suggestions in this thread. It's obviously true that this stuff would cost money and time to implement, and I'll take as given that doing so won't do much for CoH's appeal to its current audience or to its expected wider audience of "hardcore" gamers. But...
Blue_Mourning: I think it is deeply incorrect to consign Farmville and other casual games to a footnote. We may not like to hear it, and I agree that Farmville is a pretty slimy operation, but it's also the single most popular computer game ever by a ridiculous margin. NCSoft would set babies on fire to get Farmville's user and revenue numbers. And other, better casual games also earn huge revenues, often with as many or more female players as male. Why? Well, for one thing, they're casual - they don't require specialized hardware, they don't ask for more than 5 minutes at a stretch, and for the most part if they're complex the complexity is uncovered gradually and in a way that teaches as you play (and honestly CoH could really, really learn something from that last one). But also, they manage to acquire lots of female players just by not doing anything to drive them away.
Now, obviously, CoH is never going to become Farmville. The players would revolt, and the devs would probably sooner quit. Nor is CoH going to become a game for players who are driven away by the possibility of sexualized images of women (or men) - those options are already here, the players who like them are already here, and there's no sense in giving them reason to leave after years of subscribing.
But with the advent of microtransactions, there is now a simple experiment that the developers can try to get a sense of what might be worth doing:
- Build a Baron Coat for the female rig.
- Put it on sale for 40 PP.
- See how it sells.
If Freedom is about giving us all the choices they couldn't previously bundle into a pack whose overall value would be compelling to all players, then now is the time to try selling us a few niche items and seeing how they do.
@SPTrashcan
Avatar by Toxic_Shia
Why MA ratings should be changed from stars to "like" or "dislike"
A better algorithm for ordering MA arcs
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)