Main Menu

Tropes vs Women in Video Games

Started by Bludshot, December 06, 2012, 11:48:46 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Blackthorne

Why can't women have products marketed to them?  Men do.  And though I'm not your typical meathead, sports jock dude - I don't find the beer commercials that cater to the more lunk-ish members of my gender to be offensive.


Bt
"You've got to keep one eye looking over your shoulder
you know it's going to get harder and harder as you
get older - but in the end you'll pack up, fly down south, hide your head in the sand.  Just another sad old man, all alone and dying of cancer." - Dogs, Pink Floyd.

stika

Quote from: crayauchtin on December 10, 2012, 12:36:03 PM
Quote from: stika on December 10, 2012, 12:30:07 PM
In this regard we agree, the marketing is the problem and if you were to call the marketing for the products you posted (the pink laptop, pen and whatnot) sexist, I would wholeheartedly agree with you
......that IS what I said, stika. I have not, at any point, been trying to say a product is sexist. I've only been saying the marketing is.

Having a pink hair salon LEGO set is not sexist. Advertising it as a set "for girls" is.
*facepalms*

my bad, man, I misunderstood your original point

(Posted on: December 10, 2012, 03:37:47 PM)


Quote from: Blackthorne on December 10, 2012, 12:37:37 PM
Why can't women have products marketed to them?  Men do.  And though I'm not your typical meathead, sports jock dude - I don't find the beer commercials that cater to the more lunk-ish members of my gender to be offensive.


Bt

I don't think anyone said that women shouldn't have products advertised to them, in regards to your beer example, I would use the advertisements women's magazines sometimes use, which sometimes work like reverse-beer comercials, lol

crayauchtin

Quote from: Blackthorne on December 10, 2012, 12:37:37 PM
Why can't women have products marketed to them?  Men do.  And though I'm not your typical meathead, sports jock dude - I don't find the beer commercials that cater to the more lunk-ish members of my gender to be offensive.
Well, there's a couple of differences.
1) Most beer commercials entail perfectly average men and utterly gorgeous completely objectified women. You wouldn't be offended. It fits in with the patriarchal misogyny of our culture perfectly. "With this product, even the most average of men can attract the highest grade of female flesh!" :P Or how about the commercials where a guy chooses the beer over his girlfriend? Not offensive to guys, no. What's offensive here is that there's not any beer ads targeted at women. What's offensive here is that only light beer ads are ever targeted at women. Similarly, ads targeted for women probably aren't offensive to women -- what is offensive is when there is no advertising whatsoever that is for the opposite gender as well.
(And I don't mean to put it into a gender binary there, but if we can all be honest about the advertising business.... there's not enough people, at least at present, who don't fit into the gender binary to make a viable advertising demographic. Sad but true.)

2) Beer commercials are set more by the demographic -- which is because beer has been around for roughly an eternity. Not that women don't drink beer, but by their marketing research, most beer is bought by men. Simiarly, tampon commercials will not ever market towards men because men don't buy tampons (except, y'know, when they're being extra nice to a female significant other.) Whereas, market research likely shows that pens are bought by people of all genders. Because, y'know, everyone is allowed to write things down in this day and age. Creating a pink and purple pen and labeling it "For Her" is doing the opposite -- they've created the demographic by targeting the marketing at women specifically. For no real reason. And then they charge more for it, because it's for girls!
"If your translation is correct, that was 'May a sleepy hippopotamus lie down on your house keys,' but you're not sure. Unfortunately, your fluency in griffin-speak is too low."

We're roleplaying in the King's Quest world: come join in the fun!

stika

#103
Quote from: crayauchtin on December 10, 2012, 12:54:02 PM
Quote from: Blackthorne on December 10, 2012, 12:37:37 PM
Why can't women have products marketed to them?  Men do.  And though I'm not your typical meathead, sports jock dude - I don't find the beer commercials that cater to the more lunk-ish members of my gender to be offensive.
Well, there's a couple of differences.
1) Most beer commercials entail perfectly average men and utterly gorgeous completely objectified women. You wouldn't be offended. It fits in with the patriarchal misogyny of our culture perfectly. "With this product, even the most average of men can attract the highest grade of female flesh!" :P Or how about the commercials where a guy chooses the beer over his girlfriend? Not offensive to guys, no. What's offensive here is that there's not any beer ads targeted at women. What's offensive here is that only light beer ads are ever targeted at women. Similarly, ads targeted for women probably aren't offensive to women -- what is offensive is when there is no advertising whatsoever that is for the opposite gender as well.
(And I don't mean to put it into a gender binary there, but if we can all be honest about the advertising business.... there's not enough people, at least at present, who don't fit into the gender binary to make a viable advertising demographic. Sad but true.)

2) Beer commercials are set more by the demographic -- which is because beer has been around for roughly an eternity. Not that women don't drink beer, but by their marketing research, most beer is bought by men. Simiarly, tampon commercials will not ever market towards men because men don't buy tampons (except, y'know, when they're being extra nice to a female significant other.) Whereas, market research likely shows that pens are bought by people of all genders. Because, y'know, everyone is allowed to write things down in this day and age. Creating a pink and purple pen and labeling it "For Her" is doing the opposite -- they've created the demographic by targeting the marketing at women specifically. For no real reason. And then they charge more for it, because it's for girls!

I'm sorry to say this, but everytime I hear these words uttered, I can't help but cringe.

All it does is make it sound like there's this huge government conspiracy which states that women should never be anything more then housewives and that it is being carried out by a slew of agents named Smith.

To me, the use of the term 'patriarchal/mysoginist society'  is the best way to get me to antagonize with said feminist.

Moreover, it carries an undertone which makes it sound like men are inherently evil or women are inherently pure

Lambonius

Does anyone else find it interesting that the primary current antagonists in this argument are all men?  SEXIST!!!!

Blackthorne

Not all dude based Beer Commercial feature objectified women - that's an assumption on your part.  Some just have dudes playin' football, hanging out or tailgating.... so, you failed right there off the bat.  Your mind went right for the objectification of women - and that's your problem, not societies.


Bt
"You've got to keep one eye looking over your shoulder
you know it's going to get harder and harder as you
get older - but in the end you'll pack up, fly down south, hide your head in the sand.  Just another sad old man, all alone and dying of cancer." - Dogs, Pink Floyd.

Cez

Quote from: Blackthorne on December 10, 2012, 12:37:37 PM
Why can't women have products marketed to them?  Men do.  And though I'm not your typical meathead, sports jock dude - I don't find the beer commercials that cater to the more lunk-ish members of my gender to be offensive.


Bt

This.

I don't like sports. or beer. Yet I know sport and beer commercials are aimed at guys. Heck, most videogame commercials are targeted at guys. I really don't care.

We have to understand that there are social traits embedded in our brains as a society. Men like blue, girls like pink. That may sound offensive to some people, but it's a generalization that works, and when you are talking about marketing, you go for what works.

The side effect of that of course is that a guy that likes a pink beetle is going to be called a sissy. (that, on the other hand, doesn't happen with girls that like guy things, they are called "cool" if they like sports and drink beer like a man, so stop to see who has the toughest time).

But honestly, these are societal traits that aren't going to change as long as the majority of the society agrees by them. When 90% of girls stop finding pink beetles and yellow minicords "cute", marketing will stop targeting them.

I own a red mini cord. It's awesome.


Cesar Bittar
CEO
Phoenix Online
cesar.bittar@postudios.com

stika

Quote from: Cez on December 10, 2012, 01:29:22 PM
Quote from: Blackthorne on December 10, 2012, 12:37:37 PM
Why can't women have products marketed to them?  Men do.  And though I'm not your typical meathead, sports jock dude - I don't find the beer commercials that cater to the more lunk-ish members of my gender to be offensive.


Bt

This.

I don't like sports. or beer. Yet I know sport and beer commercials are aimed at guys. Heck, most videogame commercials are targeted at guys. I really don't care.

We have to understand that there are social traits embedded in our brains as a society. Men like blue, girls like pink. That may sound offensive to some people, but it's a generalization that works, and when you are talking about marketing, you go for what works.

The side effect of that of course is that a guy that likes a pink beetle is going to be called a sissy. (that, on the other hand, doesn't happen with girls that like guy things, they are called "cool" if they like sports and drink beer like a man, so stop to see who has the toughest time).

But honestly, these are societal traits that aren't going to change as long as the majority of the society agrees by them. When 90% of girls stop finding pink beetles and yellow minicords "cute", marketing will stop targeting them.

I own a red mini cord. It's awesome.
you raise a very good point there. In many ways guys have it worse then women, but it seems like these examples are often lost or ignored or forgotten

Lambonius

If I had a nickel for every time someone scolded me for dressing too sexily...

Deloria

Let's stop adhering to the "boys blue, girls pink" thing. A hundred years ago, it was the other way around because pink was considered to be closer to red and therefore a more masculine colour, while blue was a colour associated with Mary and purity. This is very much a social thing and not something that seriously caters to the preferences of toddlers.
 
Holy Roman Empress
Queen of *all* Albion
Précieuse and salonnière! :D
"In cases of doubt about language, it is ordinarily best to consult women."-Vaugelas
Space! :D Extraterrestrium! :D Espace! :D

KatieHal

Which makes me curious about how & why that completely flipped, the color thing.

Katie Hallahan
~Designer, PR Director~

"Change is the constant, the signal for rebirth, the egg of the phoenix." Christina Baldwin

I have a blog!

crayauchtin

Quote from: stika on December 10, 2012, 01:18:54 PM
I'm sorry to say this, but everytime I hear these words uttered, I can't help but cringe.

All it does is make it sound like there's this huge government conspiracy which states that women should never be anything more then housewives and that it is being carried out by a slew of agents named Smith.

To me, the use of the term 'patriarchal/mysoginist society'  is the best way to get me to antagonize with said feminist.

Moreover, it carries an undertone which makes it sound like men are inherently evil or women are inherently pure
Stika, I think you need to take a gender studies history course.

It is not a government conspiracy. It is not stating that men are evil. (You do realize I'm a man, right?) It is not stating that women are inherently pure.

What is it is stating -- and ALL that it is stating -- is that women have been oppressed for centuries by a society dominated by male control and that we need to dig ourselves out of this, because we're completely educated enough not to fall into this. That is not to say that if women had gained power they would not have subjugated men.

It's not paranoia. It's not conspiracy-theorizing. It's a fact based on knowing our cultural history. And if pointing that out makes you feel antagonistic towards whoever pointed it out, I think you need to examine why it makes you uncomfortable.
"If your translation is correct, that was 'May a sleepy hippopotamus lie down on your house keys,' but you're not sure. Unfortunately, your fluency in griffin-speak is too low."

We're roleplaying in the King's Quest world: come join in the fun!

stika

#112
Quote from: crayauchtin on December 10, 2012, 02:18:48 PM
Quote from: stika on December 10, 2012, 01:18:54 PM
I'm sorry to say this, but everytime I hear these words uttered, I can't help but cringe.

All it does is make it sound like there's this huge government conspiracy which states that women should never be anything more then housewives and that it is being carried out by a slew of agents named Smith.

To me, the use of the term 'patriarchal/mysoginist society'  is the best way to get me to antagonize with said feminist.

Moreover, it carries an undertone which makes it sound like men are inherently evil or women are inherently pure
Stika, I think you need to take a gender studies history course.

It is not a government conspiracy. It is not stating that men are evil. (You do realize I'm a man, right?) It is not stating that women are inherently pure.

What is it is stating -- and ALL that it is stating -- is that women have been oppressed for centuries by a society dominated by male control and that we need to dig ourselves out of this, because we're completely educated enough not to fall into this. That is not to say that if women had gained power they would not have subjugated men.

It's not paranoia. It's not conspiracy-theorizing. It's a fact based on knowing our cultural history. And if pointing that out makes you feel antagonistic towards whoever pointed it out, I think you need to examine why it makes you uncomfortable.
I already did, just read the the very post you quoted. Using the terms  'patriarchal/mysoginist society'  is just an attempt at finding a villain that has no physical body or form, instead it's used at men in random.

the mere fact that you're using how our society was centuries ago pretty much proves my point, how about using something a little more current?

EDIT: And I don't see how the fact that you're a man automatically negates that, Ancient Greece for example had slaves that supported slavery.


Blackthorne

Remember, you only learn in a classroom too.  Schools are a perfect microcosm of life, and they accurately reflect the way society functions.

Also, who cares if "boys like blue, girls like pink" - or that it was different a hundred years ago.  It'll be different again someday, and at that point - it'll mean as much as it does now.  Which is to say diddly-freakin'-squat.


Bt
"You've got to keep one eye looking over your shoulder
you know it's going to get harder and harder as you
get older - but in the end you'll pack up, fly down south, hide your head in the sand.  Just another sad old man, all alone and dying of cancer." - Dogs, Pink Floyd.

crayauchtin

Quote from: stika on December 10, 2012, 02:24:29 PM
I already did, just read the the very post you quoted. Using the terms  'patriarchal/mysoginist society'  is just an attempt at finding a villain that has no physical body or form, instead it's used at men in random.

the mere fact that you're using how our society was centuries ago pretty much proves my point, how about using something a little more current?

EDIT: And I don't see how the fact that you're a man automatically negates that, Ancient Greece for example had slaves that supported slavery.
........................that's not how our society was centuries ago, Stika. That's how our society has evolved. Hence the need to look at history. You did admit there's sexism in advertising. Do you think that just cropped up overnight? It's comes from thousands of years of patriarchy.

And as I said, not looking for a villain or someone (or something) to blame. It is, simply, fact. That's how our society is. That's what our society has developed from. It is and was a misogynistic, patriarchal society. You seem to be in utter denial of this, which is why I'm suggesting you ought to take a class on the topic. That fact should not make you feel antagonistic, unless you are so pleased with sexism in society you cannot imagine it changing.
"If your translation is correct, that was 'May a sleepy hippopotamus lie down on your house keys,' but you're not sure. Unfortunately, your fluency in griffin-speak is too low."

We're roleplaying in the King's Quest world: come join in the fun!

stika

#115
Quote from: crayauchtin on December 10, 2012, 02:40:06 PM

........................that's not how our society was centuries ago, Stika. That's how our society has evolved. Hence the need to look at history. You did admit there's sexism in advertising. Do you think that just cropped up overnight? It's comes from thousands of years of patriarchy.

because there are no sexist ads against men, right?


Quote from: crayauchtin on December 10, 2012, 02:40:06 PMAnd as I said, not looking for a villain or someone (or something) to blame. It is, simply, fact.
Opinion, actually

Quote from: crayauchtin on December 10, 2012, 02:40:06 PMThat's how our society is. That's what our society has developed from. It is and was a misogynistic, patriarchal society. You seem to be in utter denial of this, which is why I'm suggesting you ought to take a class on the topic. That fact should not make you feel antagonistic, unless you are so pleased with sexism in society you cannot imagine it changing.

Or maybe because your term no longer applies? Hell, maybe you're in denial.
I'm not saying we've reached equality, we're still quite a bit from it, but 'Patriarchy' assumes that men are the ones who are primarily in control, when in fact this has been slowly changing for the last hundred years.

Are we there yet? no, we are not, but i'd say throwing terms like misogynistic society only works against your goals

crayauchtin

This is probably going to be my last post on this thread because I'm guessing there's like an 85% chance this is going to get me temporarily banned and if it doesn't, I'm almost certain anything I post after this will.
Quote from: stika on December 10, 2012, 02:42:47 PM
because there are no sexist ads towards men, right?
There's some, but it's hardly the norm and it's a fairly new thing. Also, these ads are all targeted at attracting women buyers -- even ads that you really would think should be gender neutral. (Diaper ads, anyone? Really, you're only targeting one of the parents and you're gonna just assume dads are all negligent? You know what ad I'm talking about!)

I'd guess you're talking about "dumb dad" stereotype that's prevalent in ads these days? (And sitcoms too!) Okay. So it says women are smarter then men -- sure. But how do those women look? So, it also says "you don't have to be intelligent or attractive to get a good-looking, smart, competent women. They'll go for anyone." Double-edged sword.
QuoteOpinion, actually
Uhm. Let's see.
Patriarchy. System of government in which in which men hold the power and women are largely excluded from it. Hrm. How many female presidents have we had? I believe the answer you're looking for is "zero".
Oh, and what about the committee the government created not all that long ago to talk about women's health issues. How many women were actually on that committee again? I think that was also zero.

Or was "misogyny" the term you thought was an opinion? Let's see, definition: hating women in particular.
Okay. So... can you think of a word that starts with "p" that is a derogatory insult *and* a reference to a woman's reproductive parts? How about a phrase that starts with "little b" which is used almost exclusively to demasculate someone and insult them? Ohohohohoh! And there's a "c" word used to insult women which is ALSO a reference to a woman's reproductive parts? "Sissy", "fairy", "pansy", also all words used to insult someone by demasculating them.
None of this indicates any sort of hatred of women to you? The fact that at least half of the commonly used insults in our culture ALL reference femininity as an undesirable trait? And that's all current, does that make you happy? Because if this isn't enough, I could go into how long this country was around before any woman was ever even in a position to run for an office, how long it took for women to get the vote, or the right to own property... not to mention taking a look at the treatment of women from much earlier than the inception of this country.

And the evidence you have that this is not a patriarchal, misogynistic society that has evolved from centuries of patriarchy and misogyny is.....? What exactly? You don't like those words? Is that your whole argument or are you just getting warmed up?

QuoteOr maybe because your term no longer applies?
I'm sorry, what term would you have liked me to use? There's some going around in my head that are likely to get you feeling even more antagonistic.
"If your translation is correct, that was 'May a sleepy hippopotamus lie down on your house keys,' but you're not sure. Unfortunately, your fluency in griffin-speak is too low."

We're roleplaying in the King's Quest world: come join in the fun!

stika

Quote from: crayauchtin on December 10, 2012, 03:05:58 PM

There's some, but it's hardly the norm and it's a fairly new thing. Also, these ads are all targeted at attracting women buyers -- even ads that you really would think should be gender neutral. (Diaper ads, anyone? Really, you're only targeting one of the parents and you're gonna just assume dads are all negligent? You know what ad I'm talking about!)

I'd guess you're talking about "dumb dad" stereotype that's prevalent in ads these days? (And sitcoms too!) Okay. So it says women are smarter then men -- sure. But how do those women look? So, it also says "you don't have to be intelligent or attractive to get a good-looking, smart, competent women. They'll go for anyone." Double-edged sword.

Actually I wasn't even thinking of those stereotypes. The one I linked in my post for example, takes one guy and pretty much suggests that all men are dumb, pigs and are a 'pain' that should be expelled. You only provided one example, I think we both know there's dozen of stereotypes against men as well.


Quote from: crayauchtin on December 10, 2012, 03:05:58 PM
Uhm. Let's see.
Patriarchy. System of government in which in which men hold the power and women are largely excluded from it. Hrm. How many female presidents have we had? I believe the answer you're looking for is "zero".
Oh, and what about the committee the government created not all that long ago to talk about women's health issues. How many women were actually on that committee again? I think that was also zero.

To be fair I was thinking of the Western Society as a whole, now correct me if I'm wrong, but currently, isn't the most powerful head of State in Europe a woman? Miss Angla Merkel to be more exact.

And wasn't Hillary Clinton a serious candidate for Head of State in the US?

And Canada already had a female Prime Minister.

If this were a Patriarchy wouldn't all of this be impossible?


Quote from: crayauchtin on December 10, 2012, 03:05:58 PMOr was "misogyny" the term you thought was an opinion? Let's see, definition: hating women in particular.
Okay. So... can you think of a word that starts with "p" that is a derogatory insult *and* a reference to a woman's reproductive parts? How about a phrase that starts with "little b" which is used almost exclusively to demasculate someone and insult them? Ohohohohoh! And there's a "c" word used to insult women which is ALSO a reference to a woman's reproductive parts? "Sissy", "fairy", "pansy", also all words used to insult someone by demasculating them.
None of this indicates any sort of hatred of women to you? The fact that at least half of the commonly used insults in our culture ALL reference femininity as an undesirable trait? And that's all current, does that make you happy? Because if this isn't enough, I could go into how long this country was around before any woman was ever even in a position to run for an office, how long it took for women to get the vote, or the right to own property... not to mention taking a look at the treatment of women from much earlier than the inception of this country.

So your argument is that we have insults which are used against women, based on their reproductive organs

and that when you want to insult a male you question their manhood? Right, because there aren't any insults related to a man's reproductive organs, right? White we're at it, seeing as how questioning a guy's manhood is considered feminist, then what if someone calls a woman 'manly'? if they start saying she looks and acts like a guy?

That's an insult often thrown at Lesbians.

Quote from: crayauchtin on December 10, 2012, 03:05:58 PMAnd the evidence you have that this is not a patriarchal, misogynistic society that has evolved from centuries of patriarchy and misogyny is.....? What exactly? You don't like those words? Is that your whole argument or are you just getting warmed up?
Already explained

Quote from: crayauchtin on December 10, 2012, 03:05:58 PM
I'm sorry, what term would you have liked me to use? There's some going around in my head that are likely to get you feeling even more antagonistic.

How about no term at all?

What you're doing, is the equivalent of calling someone who votes for right-wing parties a 'Nazi' or someone who votes for a left-wing party a 'communist', here's an idea: How about we drop the labels?

Say

Quote from: Lambonius on December 10, 2012, 02:05:09 PM
If I had a nickel for every time someone scolded me for dressing too sexily...

Are you objectifying yourself, Lambonious? lol



Say Mistage
Phoenix Online Studios

#IndieSupport <3

Cez

#119
Quote from: Deloria on December 10, 2012, 02:08:00 PM
Let's stop adhering to the "boys blue, girls pink" thing. A hundred years ago, it was the other way around because pink was considered to be closer to red and therefore a more masculine colour, while blue was a colour associated with Mary and purity. This is very much a social thing and not something that seriously caters to the preferences of toddlers.

But that's what I'm saying. It is a general thing, and something that, in this current society, to which the current advertizing campaigns are selling their products, is a common sense rule. Maybe in a 100 years, boys like orange and girls like green and then that's what the marketing campaigns will focus on.

They are social trends, for whatever reason, and marketing only reinforces them. First Person Shooters are catered to boys because, well, apparently majority of girls are not into them. Twilight is marketed at girls because, well, it seems girls like romantic stories, and boys don't. And that's all generalizations, but it's the same public who proves that they are right.

So if you want your product to sell, why wouldn't you play on what society itself tells you?

Basically, if you were to have a crown business, you would target kings, queens and beauty pageants. You *could* say that you are discriminating Sport people because you aren't targeting them, or that you are putting labels on King and Queens, but..... that IS the social trend, why wouldn't you cater to them?


Cesar Bittar
CEO
Phoenix Online
cesar.bittar@postudios.com