Tag: rhetoric

Posted on

Tekken 7 producer slams ‘ill-informed’ critics

Tekken 7 producer slams ‘ill-informed’ critics

Let’s end this week right, with a discussion of the most desperate and hilarious attempt at comparisons between double standards to date – even more desperate than when he claimed jiggle physics were just realism.

During the interview Harada claims that Tekken contains a character (Ganryu) who is a sumo – and that people might think that he was just an inappropriately dressed man if they didn’t understand Japanese culture.

To understand how hilarious this is, we first need to recognize a few facts:

With all that we’ve just considered, let’s briefly remember that the most immediate Tekken scandal was a swimsuit pack, that Harada seems to be unsure about himself and can’t seem to link to Japanese culture in any way, shape or form.

Since Harada wouldn’t elaborate more on how it’s cultural other than to rant about “SJWs”,  let’s look at a previous Tekken 7 scandal (from 2014) and that involved a distinctly Japanese character that was poorly received by many people assumed to be “uninformed critics”:

image

It’s important to remember: Lucky Chloe did make it into the release of Tekken 7, but despite the name drop in the interview Ganryu didn’t! At least not to date, the game still hasn’t had it’s really-final-for-sure release, but Harada’s latest comment on his beloved sumo character?

image

It’s almost what he’s really upset about is that he’s not receiving unconditional praise for making something (that’s supposed to be a widely distributed commercial piece of media) just for himself at the expense of others…

image

Oh…

– wincenworks

Posted on

feministgamingmatters:

Somebody used this gif to “prove” that Metal Gear sexualises men the same as women:

Do people really think this is equivalent to Quiet (et al.) or are they being disingenuous?

I find it hilarious how dudes will insist that if people really knew about Metal Gear Solid they’d know about Raiden and that he was (allegedly) as objectified as Quiet… despite the fact Raiden and his butt run (very late in the game) were both surprises to the player (and the development team) and Quiet was used heavily as marketing material a year in advance of MGS V being released.

That and well, I could only find one figure of Raiden breathing through his skin:

image

It’s almost like he wasn’t intended to titillate or something.

– wincenworks

#nakedness doesn’t equal sexualisation

Continuing the theme of false equivalence… yes, we have seen (and commented on) people who proudly claim that Raiden’s naked run justifies Quiet’s “breathing through skin” un-costume. 

We’re also familiar with the general confusion between sexualization and nudity. Vast majority of the Status Quo Warriors conflate bare skin with being sexual, so by that logic, Conan/Kratos/Zangief are equally, if not more sexualized than their scantily-clad female peers and therefore sexism is “solved”.

This, of course, willfully ignores the simple fact that not only so much more goes into sexualization than nudity (like framing, posing, expressions etc.) or that there are different ‘decency’ standards for bodies of different sexes

(especially nipples), but also how bare skin itself doesn’t yet guarantee sexyness. 

That’s why @partsal‘s female barbarian comparison is still a perfect example of how completely different character premise can be conveyed with the same amount of bare body:

image

~Ozzie

Posted on

feministgamingmatters:

Somebody used this gif to “prove” that Metal Gear sexualises men the same as women:

Do people really think this is equivalent to Quiet (et al.) or are they being disingenuous?

I find it hilarious how dudes will insist that if people really knew about Metal Gear Solid they’d know about Raiden and that he was (allegedly) as objectified as Quiet… despite the fact Raiden and his butt run (very late in the game) were both surprises to the player (and the development team) and Quiet was used heavily as marketing material a year in advance of MGS V being released.

That and well, I could only find one figure of Raiden breathing through his skin:

image

It’s almost like he wasn’t intended to titillate or something.

– wincenworks

#nakedness doesn’t equal sexualisation

Continuing the theme of false equivalence… yes, we have seen (and commented on) people who proudly claim that Raiden’s naked run justifies Quiet’s “breathing through skin” un-costume. 

We’re also familiar with the general confusion between sexualization and nudity. Vast majority of the Status Quo Warriors conflate bare skin with being sexual, so by that logic, Conan/Kratos/Zangief are equally, if not more sexualized than their scantily-clad female peers and therefore sexism is “solved”.

This, of course, willfully ignores the simple fact that not only so much more goes into sexualization than nudity (like framing, posing, expressions etc.) or that there are different ‘decency’ standards for bodies of different sexes

(especially nipples), but also how bare skin itself doesn’t yet guarantee sexyness. 

That’s why @partsal‘s female barbarian comparison is still a perfect example of how completely different character premise can be conveyed with the same amount of bare body:

image

~Ozzie

Posted on

As a follow up to HBomber’s excellent video discussing how popular media (especially games) doesn’t objectify men I thought it was worth pointing out that the double standard is especially obvious if one looks at novelty superhero costumes (using the above examples or any of those featured at @fucknosexistcostumes)

Male costumes commonly come with the padding to simulate the muscular physiques, because they’re to make the “every man” feel like a superhero without having to work out or diet.

Female costumes commonly are sized with the assumption the wearer will fit within conventional beauty standards commonly assigned to superheroes.  The “every woman” is expected to diet and exercise to look like a drawing in a comic book.

On top of that: women who don’t fit within the very narrow, artificial beauty standards will find that the family pets get better costume options than they do.

It’s really amazing how much of reality you have to willfully disregard to try to support the “men are sexually objectified too!” argument.

– wincenworks

Posted on

hbomberguy:

New video!

As always with HBomb’s videos, he lays down a pretty in-depth breakdown of the topic at hand, in this case – the supposed male objectification of video game protagonists and general issue of gendered false equivalence in game design.

~Ozzie

see also: our thoughts regarding how empowered AND problematic Bayonetta is at the same time | thoughts on how sexualized Kratos really is | what do women find sexy in men? | why “but she’s a badass” doesn’t help

(Source: https://www.youtube.com/)
Posted on

paradoxy-intent:

sassy-gay-justice:

feministgamingmatters:

Someone did a study on sexualisation in video games, and GGers mocked them for…doing research? Because they were doing it instead of ““““making their own games.”““““ So I guess not only critique but, like, literal science isn’t valid now?

WE ARE making our own games and these dudes cry about “forced diversity” or “tokenism” or “political agendas” or w/e!! You legitimately cannot win!

I saw it put in the most interesting way a while ago: They don’t expect us to have the skill, time, effort, or desire to make our own games. They just want us to be silent.

They assume that we just want to “complain” and “be offended at everything” and they want to hand-wave away any concerns we have, regardless of their validity.

Then they assume we don’t have the skills to make our own games because they don’t think we love games as much as they supposedly do, nor do they think we haven’t been doing that since forever, and now it’s just so much easier for anyone to do.

So, they tell us to “make our own games” if we don’t like theirs, and then we do, and they pitch a fit that people are even paying attention to them or saying they’re actually good. We research, we make our own games, we do everything they tell us to do, and we still aren’t valid to them.

And we never fucking will be, because it’s never been about any of their pitiful excuses. It’s always been about shutting us out by any means necessary.

No matter how they dress it up with their bullshit about “ethics”, it’s always been about exclusion of the “undesirables” for GG. They just don’t want our “kind” here, and by that they mean anyone who isn’t a cishet white dude or isn’t okay with gaming being a “male space” for cishet white dudes.

The big issue with the “stop complaining and make your own games/shows/books/comics” rhetoric is that it’s unwinnable by design.

When someone’s not a content creator, but a critic, researcher or even just a fan casually sharing their opinion, the Status Quo Warriors would shut them down for “doing nothing” or “just whining” or “not appreciating” the media as they already are.

If someone is a content creator, the Status Quo Warriors would accuse their work of all the above “political agendas” (not realizing every creative work is political by nature) and blow every minute problem the work might have out of proportion.

And then they have the audacity to say that it’s the critics who are never satisfied.

“Go make your own thing” is really yet another variation of making up arbitrary conditions to prevent status quo-upholding media from being critiqued.

~Ozzie