Guild Wars 2

Well lets be honest, it is the internet. When ever you address a topic people feel strongly about, you can expect hateful comments (the internet is always happy to provide). Shutting down her comment section was the worst thing Sarkeesian could have done. What is the point of throwing your opinion on sexism out there, and then running away before people can respond to it?

If anything, engage in a discussion. Like I’m doing right now.

Mungrul.9358:

To perpetuate and engender the continuation of this situation is comparable to supporting Apartheid as far as I’m concerned.

I don’t agree with that. Sexism is offensive, Apartheid was much much worse. There’s a pretty big line between racial segregation and presenting one gender as a (sometimes offensive) stereotype.

Mungrul.9358:

I regard anyone who behaves in such a manner as less than human.

To perpetuate and engender the continuation of this situation is comparable to supporting Apartheid as far as I’m concerned.

These two sentences don’t blend well together. You should mail these two sentences to yourself, and read them out loud ten years from now to realise just how moronic that sounds. So far, all you’ve been doing is stampeding into this topic throwing around ad hominem insults to everyone and their mother. That’s not the way a debate is kept healthy, and I feel guilty for ever engaging a debate with you.

Expect no more responses from me towards you.

edit: @Malafide You get an ounce of respect for that post.

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

I don’t agree with that. Sexism is offensive, Apartheid was much much worse. There’s a pretty big line between racial segregation and presenting one gender as a (sometimes offensive) stereotype.

We’re talking about the societal suppression of a person based on differences defined by those with an interest in retaining power over said person.
I see no difference.

Mungrul.9358:

We’re talking about the societal suppression of a person based on differences defined by those with an interest in retaining power over said person.
I see no difference.

If you see no difference, then you may have a very poor grasp of what Apartheid was all about.

See, I’m only in this topic to criticize what I think are offensive armors for female characters. I don’t think we need more skimpy outfits, I think we need to grow up, and treat female characters normally, like we tend to treat male characters.

But to equate the position of women in games, to something as horrible and foul as Apartheid? I don’t think I need to waste any more words on that, I’m sure others will oblige.

-watch me back away slowly from your position-

Just ignore him entirely, Malafide. Also, have you perhaps considered the possibility of armour that reveals skin without obvious sexual intent? Winged armour is horrid, the two ritualists I posted were awesome if you take away the slight schism with physics:
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/File:Ritualist_Kurzick_armor_m.jpg
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/File:Ritualist_Kurzick_armor_f.jpg

I’m a great fan of the GW1 armors. The ritualist armors for example, while exposing skin, are very practical. They look good, and they don’t sexualize the characters. So yes, I do like those designs a lot. I think they are a great example how the future armors for GW2 could be improved on.

Paragons are also a great example, and paragons were unique in the way many of the male paragon armors perhaps showed more skin than the female versions. It completely fit the African setting of the expansion they were introduced in.

I think in many ways GW1 always set a pretty good example to other MMO’s, if we ignore some of the mesmer outfits and the necro scar armor. I’m a little bit saddened that they seemed to have strayed a bit from that philosophy for some of GW2’s armors. There’s nothing inherently wrong with an armor showing skin, but it’s the sexual stigma that bothers me. Its something that affects the perception of women in games across the board.

Well, that’s basically the suggestion in this topic. The thread creator wants gear that shows skin. The wisest decision thereon would be to make armour that indeed shows skin, but takes a hint from past mistakes and make such gear without obvious sexual intent.

Why not have all kinds of revealing armor. If you don’t want to see them then don’t wear them. If you don’t want to see other people wear them , go some place where there aren’t people who have that armor. If it really bothers you that much, don’t play.

No one can speak on behalf of their own gender, because each individual has his or her own tastes. This is an MMOrpg after all and people like to live out their own fantasies in social games. Since this game is rated Teen players have to adhere to the rules of conduct. Suggestive themes are allowed in teen rated games so being promiscuous may or may not be allowed.

Maybe what the OP really wants is more types of flirty armor. They don’t necessarily have to show more skin.

There are too many and I mean TOO MANY MMORPG’s with totally revealing armor.
GW2 doesn’t have to be this way.
Nice, elegant, decent and not extreme armor which does not insult a gender can be added, pleasing both sides.
Leave it out of GW2, just leave it out of GW2…seriously…
It won’t ‘’kill you’’ if you can’t wear a lingerie.
Add elegant armor, which reveals ’’enough’’ skin, but which is not insulting. Thank you.

Rubykuby.3427:

Well, that’s basically the suggestion in this topic. The thread creator wants gear that shows skin. The wisest decision thereon would be to make armour that indeed shows skin, but takes a hint from past mistakes and make such gear without obvious sexual intent.

The thing is, if you ask for skimpy outfits, what most people read is scanty outfits. Proper application of the word is key here. I think most people would assume that skimpy means, showing more cleavage and such. And obviously not everyone agrees on that.

But more options? A definite yes. But I would personally prefer more of the full body suits from GW1. There really is very little at the moment, to really make a necromancer look like a necromancer.

This for example:

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/File:Apprentice_hf_full_f.jpg

Isn’t a necromancer.

Chewablesleeptablet.3185:

Why not have all kinds of revealing armor. If you don’t want to see them then don’t wear them. If you don’t want to see other people wear them , go some place where there aren’t people who have that armor. If it really bothers you that much, don’t play.

We’ve already discussed that at the start of this discussion, and we’ve pretty much taken that argument apart entirely. Because that’s not what this is about at all. I would encourage you to read the rest of the discussion, because a lot of ground was already covered.

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

Rubykuby.3427:

Well, that’s basically the suggestion in this topic. The thread creator wants gear that shows skin. The wisest decision thereon would be to make armour that indeed shows skin, but takes a hint from past mistakes and make such gear without obvious sexual intent.

The thing is, if you ask for skimpy outfits, what most people read is scanty outfits. Proper application of the word is key here. I think most people would assume that skimpy means, showing more cleavage and such. And obviously not everyone agrees on that.

But more options? A definite yes. But I would personally prefer more of the full body suits from GW1. There really is very little at the moment, to really make a necromancer look like a necromancer.

This for example:

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/File:Apprentice_hf_full_f.jpg

Isn’t a necromancer.

It could be a necromancer…… Dye colors. Green and Black, maybe a little brown. Mix and match. In GW2 you just have to be more creative with mix and match of armors.

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

Mirta.5029:

Did you play the game? Gloria is a very strong character. Most of the women in Devil May Cry are actually the tougher bosses. Men are normally the ones given for easy fights.

When we say that someone is a strong character, what we mean is that they are well written characters. Not that they have lots of hitpoints and devastating attacks.

For example, most of the characters in the game Heavy Rain are strong characters. They are well written as characters. Of course Heavy Rain also makes the mistake of again having the female main character have a pointless shower scene, so it loses some points there. Its pretty clear that videogames still have a long way to go as an art form.

The new Tomb Raider kind of tries the “strong female character” approach, but then occasionally trips when ever it feels the need for a pointless cleavage shot during many of the cut scenes.

Other examples of sexism towards women, are for example the persistent unlockable bikini outfits for female characters, that almost every game with unlockable outfits has (even in the game Fatal Frame, the main characters of which I do believe are minors). Oddly enough you never see unlockable underwear outfits for men. Men must feel terribly offended by their repeated underwear-lacking portrayal /sarcasm.

heavy rain is well written? Heavy rain is one big plothole. You can hear the enemies thoughts for god’s sakes and he doesn’t think anything about the crime and even refers to it as if he didn’t do it. He either has a big personality disorder or they did a twist just to sell more. I would say it’s the second option. Twisting a story in order to sell more copies even though it has no logical connection to the story itself is quite popular. Bioshock 3 did it too.
Gloria does have a personality. She’s an established character since the first one. Like I said you should actually play it.
I like the unlockable underwear. It’s not sexism, it’s being sexy, you virgin prude. And yeah, I wish I could unlock undies for men. What is so wrong with the human body that you feel the absolute need to hide it? Are women really that ugly in your opinion? Are we so disgusting that we should be ashamed of wearing underwear? Why do we wear swimsuits then? We do the illogical thing of wearing underwear to a beach and think that it’s fine but if a game has unlockable underwear suddenly it’s horrible?

Mirta.5029:

heavy rain is well written? Heavy rain is one big plothole.

The characters are well written. I have no comments on the story as a whole. Uncharted also has well written female characters.

Mirta.5029:

Gloria does have a personality. She’s an established character since the first one. Like I said you should actually play it.

Which part of her character explains her riding with her crotch lodged on top of enemies, while the camera zooms in on her sexy parts?

Mirta.5029:

We do the illogical thing of wearing underwear to a beach and think that it’s fine but if a game has unlockable underwear suddenly it’s horrible?

If the game only unlocks skimpy outfits for women, and then has them run around in places where no one in their right mind would wear only underwear? Yeah, thats pretty sexist.

Mirta.5029:

Are women really that ugly in your opinion? Are we so disgusting that we should be ashamed of wearing underwear?

There is more to women than just sexy outfits. Why do so many videogames have trouble looking beyond their smooth curves?

Mirta.5029:

It’s not sexism, it’s being sexy, you virgin prude.

When you resort to personal insults, you disqualify yourself from polite discussion.

I think this thread is missing some basics.

Men and women are different. Men and women have different fantasies. Women objectify and dehumanize men all the time; no clothes involved. Watch twilight, read a dime romance novel; the men in these are perfect gentlemen, sensitive to the every need of their beloved and willing to drop everything for her, right up until they turn into bestial badboys who wear black leather and ride motorcycles into the sunset- then it’s back to being overly sensitive and great with kids.
The problem is, it’s not easy to implement the female fantasy in a game like this; whereas making some hot female pixels and striping her clothes off for the guys isn’t hard at all.
Is it objectifying and dehumanizing to the gender as a whole? Yasureyoubetcha. So the real debate is whether people should want to do this in a game or not.
So while you guys debate over that, I’ll leave a link to this thread here: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Logan-Thackeray-Joke-Thread/first
And I’ll claim that I have no idea why anyone would make fun of Logan Thackeray’s character.

Kitcat.1739:

Watch twilight, read a dime romance novel;

I think few people would defend the quality of Twilight. But when you read that book, you pretty much get exactly what the cover says. Its a badly written teen girl romance novel. It pretty much delivers exactly as advertised. I don’t think that is a very valid comparison.

Kitcat.1739:

The problem is, it’s not easy to implement the female fantasy in a game like this; whereas making some hot female pixels and striping her clothes off for the guys isn’t hard at all.
Is it objectifying and dehumanizing to the gender as a whole? Yasureyoubetcha. So the real debate is whether people should want to do this in a game or not.

I personally don’t see an MMO as a fitting place to cater to sexual fantasies. I think they have niche games for that that do that far more efficiently. Besides, I don’t think female sexual fantasy is all that different from male fantasies. Its all pretty subjective really. But why is this in MMO’s to begin with?

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

Which part of her character explains her riding with her crotch lodged on top of enemies, while the camera zooms in on her sexy parts?

She should not perform acrobatic moves in combat, because you don’t like her to sit on anything? I imagine if you jumped on someone and used your legs you could twist their neck off.

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

If the game only unlocks skimpy outfits for women, and then has them run around in places where no one in their right mind would wear only underwear? Yeah, thats pretty sexist.

then those nudist colonies must be REALLY sexist. How dare they walk around all nude? I mean having a body hurts women so much!

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

There is more to women than just sexy outfits. Why do so many videogames have trouble looking beyond their smooth curves?

and like I said – most women in video games are well established characters. You devalued Gloria’s personality because of the outfit she wore. You know what feminists used to fight for? Freedoms. One of the freedoms was wearing whatever women desire to wear, instead of being forced into long covering dresses. Why do you have a problem seeing that a lot of those sexy dressed women have a very well written personality?

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

I’m a great fan of the GW1 armors. The ritualist armors for example, while exposing skin, are very practical. They look good, and they don’t sexualize the characters. So yes, I do like those designs a lot. I think they are a great example how the future armors for GW2 could be improved on.

Paragons are also a great example, and paragons were unique in the way many of the male paragon armors perhaps showed more skin than the female versions. It completely fit the African setting of the expansion they were introduced in.

I think in many ways GW1 always set a pretty good example to other MMO’s, if we ignore some of the mesmer outfits and the necro scar armor. I’m a little bit saddened that they seemed to have strayed a bit from that philosophy for some of GW2’s armors. There’s nothing inherently wrong with an armor showing skin, but it’s the sexual stigma that bothers me. Its something that affects the perception of women in games across the board.

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

The thing is, if you ask for skimpy outfits, what most people read is scanty outfits. Proper application of the word is key here. I think most people would assume that skimpy means, showing more cleavage and such. And obviously not everyone agrees on that.

But more options? A definite yes. But I would personally prefer more of the full body suits from GW1.

It seems to me that you are on the same page as the bulk of us then. These arguments have been for the most part pointless. We have understood your standpoint on practical armor since your first post. Just because we don’t all agree doesn’t mean we didn’t comprehend it.

For the most part (I can’t speak for everyone in this post, but I’m sure many would agree with me here), the armor’s from GW1 are what we are asking for. Rather than design all new armor sets, just bring the armor sets that were made fro GW1 over to GW2. There were a lot of amazing full coverage and revealing armors in GW1.

Also… we all really seem to agree that “skimpy” was the wrong word choice. If we can move away from that word to a more appropriate word that would be great. We’ve tried “revealing” too but that also seems to give off the same impression as “skimpy” to far to many people.

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

If the game only unlocks skimpy outfits for women, and then has them run around in places where no one in their right mind would wear only underwear? Yeah, thats pretty sexist.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSOWrHlr9wA

Just a small point: Fatal Frame isn’t a very good choice for use as an example… in fact most if not all Japanese and Korean based games are poor choices here… Those games are grossly over sexualized and are a poor representation of the video game industry. Many respected and popular developers even criticize them for how they portray female characters. Japanese culture is among, if not THE, most sexualized cultures in the world. It’s excessively common for them to portray sexist content in games, movies, books, comics, and artwork, as well as simple daily advertisements.

Panda.1967:

Japanese culture is among, if not THE, most sexualized cultures in the world. It’s excessively common for them to portray sexist content in games, movies, books, comics, and artwork, as well as simple daily advertisements.

You have a point there. Although this whole sexy costume unlock thing isn’t exclusive to Japanese games I think.

Mirta.5029:

She should not perform acrobatic moves in combat, because you don’t like her to sit on anything? I imagine if you jumped on someone and used your legs you could twist their neck off.

She grinds enemies in a sexual manner, while the camera zooms in on her naughty parts. Or are you just trolling?

then those nudist colonies must be REALLY sexist. How dare they walk around all nude? I mean having a body hurts women so much!

I think nudist colonies are designed specifically to be a normal place for no clothing. And on top of that, everyone is nude at a nudist colony. I don’t see how this is relevant to the portrayal of women in a medium.

Mirta.5029:

and like I said – most women in video games are well established characters. You devalued Gloria’s personality because of the outfit she wore.

She grinds enemies with her crotch while the camera zooms in on her crotch and butt! I haven’t even mentioned her outfit yet!

Mirta.5029:

You know what feminists used to fight for?

Who cares? I’m not a feminist.

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

She grinds enemies in a sexual manner, while the camera zooms in on her naughty parts. Or are you just trolling?

So? What’s so wrong with that? Sounds like wrestling to me. Men do it too.

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

I think nudist colonies are designed specifically to be a normal place for no clothing. And on top of that, everyone is nude at a nudist colony. I don’t see how this is relevant to the portrayal of women in a medium.

think of the medium as a nudist colony. Both sexes are portrayed as their perfect looking selves. Male portrayal in the medium is nothing different. There’s also nothing bad in portraying characters to be pretty and sexy. You seem to shun human body though.

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

She grinds enemies with her crotch while the camera zooms in on her crotch and butt! I haven’t even mentioned her outfit yet!

sounds like wrestling to me.

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

Who cares? I’m not a feminist.

yet you act like one. You act as if there wasn’t any sexualisation of males in video games. You act as if looking attractive is bad. You act as if you would rather the world turned your way. That’s how feminists now days work and you fit the picture perfectly.

Mirta.5029:

yet you act like one. You act as if there wasn’t any sexualisation of males in video games. You act as if looking attractive is bad. You act as if you would rather the world turned your way. That’s how feminists now days work and you fit the picture perfectly.

Enjoy your strawman, have fun with it, but leave me out of it. If you have the idea that that is my opinion, even though I have specifically stated the exact opposite on multiple occasions, then you haven’t been reading my posts, and you are just trolling. I think I’m done discussing with you, and I think I’ll continue discussing with the other mature folk in this thread.

Unfortunately the majority (and almost all) female characters from games are described this way and people will think that is ’’right’’ and that it is completely normal.
Some of them even have ‘’kitten-ish’’ behaviour…I am finding it more than sad.
I know it pleases the majority of people, especially men, but also women…
And don’t tell me it doesn’t affect the mentality, because it does. Soon it wouldn’t even surprise me if one breast could be visible, while the other could be covered with a piece of cloth…for it appears that the world is heading in that direction…allowing all the ‘’human rights’’. Some things need to have a limit.
Besides, looking at the music scene nowadays (pop) is really disgraceful. I went a little off topic here…but I felt like saying this.
Adding armor which reveals a bit of skin is completely OK…but adding something too skimpy, which reveals certain parts can be insulting and is insulting women. I have nothing against nice, elegant clothes which can reveal a bit of skin, even whole stomach, legs etc…but all with great taste and grace.
Even if I am a guy, I am still against skimpiness (skimpiness in extreme way).

So we are mostly on the same page afterall? Skimpy being a bad choice of words. More options all around, revealing armor to all that want that, males and females (ala those in GW1, I loved elite druid and the rit armor) More formfitting, but mostly covering sets. More armor all in all, lots of variation, to cater to all types of people.

I do not think any of the “skimpy” sets currently in GW2 is bad though, no matter what you say. I love the winged set and wear it on my sylvari mesmer atm. Also I like the cultural t3 human armor (both light and medium) and will definitely be getting it for my engineer at some point.

Agree it should not turn skimpier than those, though. Just want more of that style or GW1 style.

Zeefa.3915:

So we are mostly on the same page afterall?

I already figured most of us were on the same page like 2 pages ago I think. Even MQM, we’re all just expressing an opinion not really domineering a cause. I was mainly just trying to subtly steer the conversation to cod pieces…

…come on, an Asura with a cod piece that goes down to his knees. Nothing wrong with that

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

I’m all for that. Bring out the open jackets and exposed male chests, if equality is what we want.

You already said you did want for equality by having male characters exposing their bodies. You claimed it would increase the number of exposed women characters armor.

You say you want equality but you really want censorship. Anet is making a nice censored version of the game for china. Maybe you can play that?

Onshidesigns.1069:

You say you want equality but you really want censorship. Anet is making a nice censored version of the game for china. Maybe you can play that?

I didn’t ask for censorship. What on earth are you on about?

It boggles my mind how people can derive a completely extreme view point from my posts, despite the fact that I’ve been consistently leaning the other way.

How is criticizing sexism in video games equal to wanting censorship?

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

Onshidesigns.1069:

You say you want equality but you really want censorship. Anet is making a nice censored version of the game for china. Maybe you can play that?

I didn’t ask for censorship. What on earth are you on about?

It boggles my mind how people can derive a completely extreme view point from my posts, despite the fact that I’ve been consistently leaning the other way.

How is criticizing sexism in video games equal to wanting censorship?

Most of the replies are yours. Only 2 or 3 people agree with you on this and it’s only because they don’t want the game to have Tera style armor. But I’ve only only bing asking for a Little bit more revealing armor. I’m not asking for thongs.

I’ve read your post and I know you want almost all female skin covered. That view is extremist in most developed countries that are a democracy.

Onshidesigns.1069:

Most of the replies are yours.

Because I’m one of the few people on this forum defending women in regards to their portrayal in games.

Onshidesigns.1069:

Only 2 or 3 people agree with you on this

You mean only 2 or 3 people have bothered to reply that they agree. That is very different from an actual number of people that agree with me, which I’m sure is a lot more.

Onshidesigns.1069:

I’ve read your post and I know you want almost all female skin covered. That view is extremist in most developed countries that are a democracy.

Then please provide a quote where I ask all female skin to be covered. I dare you, find a post where I ask for this. Go on. Go find me that quote.

See what we have here is a classic example of the strawman argument. You alter the opinion of the original poster, to the point where its a position that everyone would disagree with, and then beat up on that opinion. However, it is no longer the original opinion that was expressed, and thus you are making a false argument. This strategy of discussion is all over this topic, and I have repeatedly now called several of you out on it. Its a very dishonest thing to do.

I thought for that Malafide was going to an extremist point too, as she seemed very much against the idea. But she has actually said she liked the GW1 ritualist and paragon armor, which is revealing, but looks sort of natural. Not sure how she felt about elite druid for rangers, but she have not been saying anything against that.

Pretty sure I spotted her agreeing to revealing armor, as long as it stays to the natural look like the forementioned ritualist armor. She is infact asking for choice as are we.

She has said she don’t want more like the winged set or even skimpier than that. I can respect that. I like the winged set, but I definitely don’t want to see anything any skimpier than that either. Suppose I mostly like it on my sylvari too… felt kinda wrong on my norn… actually it felt very wrong on my norn.

So to sum up – no more like the winged set, but revealing in a more natural way like the GW1 armors is okay. At the same time we want more formfitting, armors without being revealing and in general just more styles to choose from.

This topic have been derailing into an argument about sexism and whatnot, because of different interpretations of the word skimpy.

Not sure why you’re beating down Winged Armor. It does have a fairy/dragonfly motif that looks pretty cool…on female characters. The fairy/dragonfly motif is lost, however, when translated to anything other than norn/sylvari/human females, which is the only bad part about it.

If you’re talking about Feathered, well, I’m not a fan of the set despite using it. There’s not much feathered about it, which is probably why I don’t like it, and it suffers from the same issues as Winged armor; it loses all identity when not the female version.

Would I want more revealing armor like Winged or Feathered? Sure, just no butt capes though. That looks stupid, IMO. Nothing wrong with aiming for a visual motif and succeeding, like in the case of Feathered, even if it’s pretty revealing. Just don’t half-succeed by dropping the motif for the male version (which doesn’t even have extended wings!!).

The problem here is that Malafide assumes – as feminists would – that (only) women are discriminated against. She also confuses the terms sexist and sexual. A sexual portrayal of women isn’t sexist per se. Men, too, are portrayed in a sexually attractive manner in video games, but different entirely. She puts women in the victim role of this grand patriarchal desire for sexually attractive women in video games (and assumes that this is harmful), but ignores entirely that individuals of either gender have individual feelings towards the subject entirely. Some men really don’t like skimpy clothes on women, and neither do some women. On the other hand, there are both men and women who do like the latter. Women aren’t victimised if women agree to the way their characters are portrayed, and quite frankly, a proportional amount of women do.

In the same manner, “ME SMASH” characters are arguably sexist towards men, because those characters are never ever female. And though I personally take offence to this to some extent (the assumption that men are stupid and can only solve things in brutal combat), I realise that these characters are very much liked by others, and have their place in gaming universes. My only wish? That female characters, too, may be “ME SMASH” characters. In the very same way, it is also my desire that men, too, may be portrayed like a chunk of women in video games are portrayed; sexualised to some extent.

Rubykuby.3427:

The problem here is that Malafide assumes – as feminists would – that (only) women are discriminated against.

I don’t. I simply defend women specifically, because by far they seemed to be forced in the typical sexual stereotype the most often, in video games.

And I think that fact is pretty hard to deny. Just looking at the depiction of women in video games overall, its persistently sexual. And that stereotype in itself it sexist, since men are not (or rarely) portrayed as such.

Rubykuby.3427:

Women aren’t victimised if women agree to the way their characters are portrayed, and quite frankly, a proportional amount of women do.

And also a proportional amount of women don’t. That doesn’t change anything about the gender stereotype that is being presented. And I think a majority of female gamers would actually be against this sort of stereotyping (and perhaps a minority of male gamers).

Mad Queen Malafide: *I don’t. I simply defend women specifically, because by far they seemed to be forced in the typical sexual stereotype the most often, in video games.

And I think that fact is pretty hard to deny. Just looking at the depiction of women in video games overall, its persistently sexual. And that stereotype in itself it sexist, since men are not (or rarely) portrayed as such.*

I wouldn’t say this is true. I have played in MULTIPLE servers on GW2, WoW, and even stuff on Xbox 360 and PS3, and when there was a girl in the lobby or game, everyone was nice to her. They treated her like an actual gamer.

And woman can be sexist too. My friend wanted to become a cheer leader because he had good flexibility. And the girls wouldn’t let him on the team. They told him, “We cheer leaders need smart and pretty girls on our team! Not ugly and stupid boys!” This might not be sexist, but he found it sexist. He was depressed for the rest of the school year.

That doesn’t mean woman ARE sexist. I’m a singer, actor, and dancer. And girls I’ve met accepted that in me. They were nice and didn’t straight out say I was stupid or anything.

So you SEE?

Woman can be sexist, and also not sexist.

Man can be sexist, and also not sexist.

There really isn’t one main department in sexism, it’s all equal. Man and woman are both sexist. So why don’t we just stop the bickering and get back to the actual topic?

Derpula Stevens, you completely missed the point. We were discussing the sexism regarding the portrayal of female characters in games. And not the way gamers of different genders treat each other online. You really need to follow the discussion first before you can just blindly chime in with your own opinion.

I know everyone is eager to jump on the lets-gang-up-on-Malafide bandwagon for defending women. But if you can’t be bothered to read the arguments or follow the discussion, you’re just going to come off as uninformed.

Seven bleeding pages of Opinion Pong and it’s gone completely off topic. Can we rest now?

Why not just make a topic about this, and stop talking about it in this topic. Mmm?

Its really not that off topic at all. We’re still discussing skimpy clothing after all. And addressing the issue of female characters always being depicted in a sexual way, is a faaaar more interesting matter than the original premise of this topic. So this is exactly the right place to discuss it. There are pretty valid reasons to be against skimpy clothing. But clearly some people get a little bit uncomfortable when valid concerns are brought forward, and they are challenged to honestly think about the subject. Does this question frighten some of you that much? Some of the other posters weren’t afraid to debate it.

But it’s not totally related either. If you’re going to address the way female characters are placed in games, then make a topic about it. Don’t change the subject of another topic.

I think light armor is pretty well filled with options for skimpy armor. But what they did to medium armor is horrible there are so many coats which just look very cheap on a female. I really think there should be more skimpy armor for medium armor, personally I like a female too look beautiful in a game and not like a steel tank.

I want to point out that some people like it more skimpy (like me) and some don’t. I think there are enough options for full covering armor already, but skimpy options are just missing! I respect people who want a full covered armor, but hey they should not flame if there are skimpy options too, as long you can choose what style you prefer.

For those saying it’s unrealistic, I can only give a laugh. I mean wtf guys it is a FANTASY game, nothing of the stuff happening there is realistic.

So yea, please add some more options for revealing armor (especially in medium/heavy)

Derpula Stevens.8249:

But it’s not totally related either. If you’re going to address the way female characters are placed in games, then make a topic about it. Don’t change the subject of another topic.

But we didn’t change the subject, we’re still addressing skimpy outfits. You just came in here to tell people to stop discussing things on a forum. If you’re not interested in discussion, there’s the door. You can leave any time.

Almdudler.8621:

For those saying it’s unrealistic, I can only give a laugh. I mean wtf guys it is a FANTASY game, nothing of the stuff happening there is realistic.

I don’t think anyone is making that argument.

Malafide: But we didn’t change the subject, we’re still addressing skimpy outfits. You just came in here to tell people to stop discussing things on a forum.

How exactly did I tell people to stop discussing things on a forum? I said if you are gonna some how change the topic (Even just a little bit) Make your own topic about it.

Derpula Stevens.8249:

How exactly did I tell people to stop discussing things on a forum? I said if you are gonna some how change the topic (Even just a little bit) Make your own topic about it.

That’s pretty much the same thing. Its an easy way out to avoid having to discuss something you feel uncomfortable discussing. And telling someone to go find a topic of their own, even though it is entirely on topic, is easier than actually addressing the criticism of skimpy outfits.

I don’t see how the sexism part was ENTIRELY on topic. You’re talking about the way female characters are portrayed in the game, and how it is sexist. The main topic on here is about skimpy armor and why we need it. I don’t know whether you’re saying the skimpy armor is the sexist part, or not having it is the sexist part, but it’s not fully related to this topic.

Well of course you don’t know. You didn’t read any of the discussion. You just read the last few posts and made up your mind.

Because if you had read it, you would understand how it is entirely ON-topic.

I just read everything now, and still, I cannot see how it is FULLY ENTIRELY 100% on topic.

Then maybe you aren’t qualified for discussing the topic at all. I mean, you have to care about what you are reading of course.

The most important part of any discussion, is the willingness of both sides to understand each other’s position. Without it, decent discussion is impossible.

No wonder there are this many pages…

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

Derpula Stevens, you completely missed the point. We were discussing the sexism regarding the portrayal of female characters in games. And not the way gamers of different genders treat each other online. You really need to follow the discussion first before you can just blindly chime in with your own opinion.

I know everyone is eager to jump on the lets-gang-up-on-Malafide bandwagon for defending women. But if you can’t be bothered to read the arguments or follow the discussion, you’re just going to come off as uninformed.

Noone is talking about sexism in games but you. This post is about a little more revealing armor for both men and women. But keep in mind what people like on women is not the same as what they like on men.

If you want to complain about it, there are other games forums that show far more.

But surely you understand how the two are connected? Revealing armor for women is directly linked to how we perceive female characters in games in general. And specifically in MMO’s (they are the worst offenders) female characters tend to be the least dressed, with a large focus on nudity.

Mad Queen Malafide.7512:

Rubykuby.3427:

Women aren’t victimised if women agree to the way their characters are portrayed, and quite frankly, a proportional amount of women do.

And also a proportional amount of women don’t. That doesn’t change anything about the gender stereotype that is being presented. And I think a majority of female gamers would actually be against this sort of stereotyping (and perhaps a minority of male gamers).

What? This makes no sense, and akin to the following: Female vocals in Pop songs differ from male vocals in Pop songs. Not because the voices sound different, and not because the tones have a higher pitch, but because the general musical composition of both vocals differ heavily. This is sexist. Some women do not like the way female vocals work in Pop songs, and want more masculine vocals of female singers.

Yeah, that makes no sense. What you’re doing is exactly the same. And guess what? There is some slight amount of merit to not liking feminine vocals in Pop songs. Some people may be more attracted to the masculine composition of vocals, and that’s fine. They may listen to male singers, or female singers who happen to have a masculine vocal composition. The same goes reversely. If you like female vocals, you may listen to female singers, or men who “sing like a girl”, as James Blunt put it. That aside, James Blunt is a Soft Rock singer, but I’m using Pop for convenience.

You’re assuming that the stereotype is sexist, yet you have nothing to back that up with. The only thing you’re clinging onto is the illusion that only women are depicted sexually in video games, which I’ve proved not to be true (with sources) a few posts back. I’ll repeat; men are sexually depicted in different ways entirely, and are tied to different standards than women are. Logan Thackeray is a highly sexualised character, despite barely showing any skin.

You claim you’re “defending women”, which is a feminist illusion. There is no such thing as defending women, at least not anymore, for feminism itself has instated the individualisation of the female sex. Women are every bit as diverse as men, and GW2 has done a fantastic job in showing diversity everywhere. The fact GW2 still has sexually appealing armour doesn’t mean it’s being sexist, it means that it, too, includes that bit of diversity among many other alternatives.

Notwithstanding, you’re cherrypicking parts of my posts to your own convenience. You leave out my strongest of arguments without so much mentioning them. As a matter of fact, you ignore my core suggestions time after time, which I conveniently put at the end of almost every post.

Rubykuby.3427:

What? This makes no sense, and akin to the following: Female vocals in Pop songs differ from male vocals in Pop songs. Not because the voices sound different, and not because the tones have a higher pitch, but because the general musical composition of both vocals differ heavily. This is sexist. Some women do not like the way female vocals work in Pop songs, and want more masculine vocals of female singers.

This is a pretty big misconception. Suppose male characters would be consistently be portrayed wearing a cod piece, and not much more. Would you not agree that that is a pretty offensive stereotype? It doesn’t matter if “some” people approve of the stereotype. What matters is that it is an offensive stereotype.

There is a big difference between two genders being depicted differently, and one being depicted in a bad light, while the other is depicted normally. So your comparison really doesn’t apply.

Rubykuby.3427:

You’re assuming that the stereotype is sexist, yet you have nothing to back that up with.

Whether it’s sexist, is a matter of personal opinion. I think personally, that constantly portraying any gender (male or female) in nothing but a sexual manner, is offensive to the gender, whether some individuals within that gender group approve of it or not. What makes it sexist, is the difference in which both genders are represented within the same medium. They are not presented as equals. Instead, one is presented as an object of desire, a male’s fantasy, while the other is presented as just a man.

Rubykuby.3427:

men are sexually depicted in different ways entirely, and are tied to different standards than women are. Logan Thackeray is a highly sexualised character, despite barely showing any skin.

Men are hardly depicted in a sexualised way at all. Logan a sexualised character? Come on! He’s not running around in a cod piece flexing his muscles. Not like Dante in Devil May Cry, who I would argue, is presented in a sexual manner.

Rubykuby.3427:

You claim you’re “defending women”, which is a feminist illusion. There is no such thing as defending women,

Well more like defending the side of women, not so much women themselves. I’m sure they can fend for them selves.

Rubykuby.3427:

Notwithstanding, you’re cherrypicking parts of my posts to your own convenience. You leave out my strongest of arguments without so much mentioning them. As a matter of fact, you ignore my core suggestions time after time, which I conveniently put at the end of almost every post.

That’s a dishonest argument. When I reply to every bit of someone’s post, people are offended. When I select lines I specifically want to respond to, people are offended again. I choose not to quote and go into every single sentence in your post. But if there is any specific issue you want me to respond to, just say so.

Because I think it’s pretty clear by now that I don’t run away from polite discussion. (and I’m also not so easily scared off by dishonesty and strawman arguments)