Video Tropes vs Women in Video Games

[Blazekickblaziken]

You have to check if the source material is a message unto itself, or if it simply reflects society. If it reflect society and is not meant as a message (Pokémon), then it has no significance in the gender equality debate. If the game was not a reflection of society and heavily favored women, your objection would likely be that it ignores social issues in favor of fantasy. Like it or not, the fantasy in games comes from the mind of a developer, who lives in a society that has these issues. They are going to exist in games because society has
When I said you were actively seeking out sexism in Pokémon, I meant that you were looking for it in a place where, even if is existed, it would make no difference to anyone. Regarding your examples, you can find a social issue in any character that has even the slightest depth if you look hard enough.

I'm not entirely sure what you're saying. If its' sexism is reflecting society, then int's ok, because that's just how things are?

The point that I think you're missing is the normalization effect media has. For example, regarding the female trainers: the fact that there's a disproportionate number of attractive female vs attractive male normalizes this gender aesthetic. That is to say men look however they wan, women look attractive. (This isn't to say the effect is enormous or that it's the sole cause, but however miniscule it's effect is, it's still there.)

 

[The Federation]

Making a blanket statement of "sexism in X place wouldn't bother anyone" in itself bothers me, honestly. You can find sexism is many places, and often it's not so much the fact that it was in one particular place that's the problem; the problem is that issues like sexism are so ingrained in our culture that you find it just about everywhere.

I guess I wasn't very clear with my message. I'll try again, this time without being an idiot with my choice of words. If you find sexism in Pokémon, what you are finding isn't sexism. It is a reflection of the society we live in, but in fantasy form. I would argue that for sexism to have any impact it has to be deliberate. So far, nobody had provided any examples of true sexism in Pokémon as far as I know, with most referencing the fact that professors happen to be male more of the time, and some of the female avatars are more feminized. This doesn't warrant discrimination or prejudice on the part of the developers, and has no adverse effect or message on or to the player.

You can find the same patterns of narratives and stereotypes, even though they might be packaged differently or be less in-your-face. (After all, nothing exists in a vacuum.) Nearly everywhere you look in popular culture you will find anything from traces of to outright sexism, and the more you open your eyes to it the more you'll notice it. And frankly, some of us are tired of it.

Where are females actively discriminated against? Open my eyes. Women tend to make less money, but that's only one example. I agree that games don't exist in vacuums whole-heartedly.

Really, my point is that just because you don't notice sexism and it doesn't bother you, doesn't make it true for everyone. I may not be as likely to notice or be affected by racism, but a person of colour may not be "actively seeking it" when it comes knocking. But if some people notice a problem and want to talk about it, who does it benefit to shut the conversation down entirely?

That's not what my point was and I'm sorry for my bang-up job at trying to get my message across. FYI, I am never against conversation and debate. Keeping an open mind means accepting new ideas as possible and then scrutinizing them until they become reasonable.

I'm not entirely sure what you're saying. If its' sexism is reflecting society, then int's ok, because that's just how things are?

The point that I think you're missing is the normalization effect media has. For example, regarding the female trainers: the fact that there's a disproportionate number of attractive female vs attractive male normalizes this gender aesthetic. That is to say men look however they wan, women look attractive. (This isn't to say the effect is enormous or that it's the sole cause, but however miniscule it's effect is, it's still there.)

Yes, that is sort of what I am saying. However, I would like to include that a game's basis in society in cases where it reflects society, sexism shouldn't be an issue if it isn't done on purpose. Taking out the issues artificially ignores the issue and sidesteps the consequences, which is at least as bad as leaving the issues in the game.

Attractive female characters are predominant, just like powerful or capable male characters are predominant in male sprites. Males in society are similarly objectified, except for their ability to make money or physically dominate rather than their attractiveness.

 

[Lugia-sama]

Don't you think there are better things to fund then sexism on video games?:/
You have to agree that there is sexism and racism everywhere (women get it...men get it....blacks get it...Chinese....jewish...you name it)
I doubt you can stop all of it, and you have to look at the important things in sexism and racism, where people are actually getting hurt and not just in some video game.
Just my opinion anyway.

I mean I have no problem with speaking out against it...but funding it?:/ Not so sure.

Plus sometimes sexism is a double-edged sword for both parties. The damsel in distress thing pisses women off because they're displayed as weak, but it might piss men off because they are shown to be ones having to do all the work (kinda the same thing for "women as a reward," while women are pissed because they are displayed as commodities, men might be pissed because they have to work to get the girl, but the girl just sits there and doesn't work for the guy.) You kinda see it? Trust me if you squint and look sideways everything is some sort of sexist, racist, religious offensive comment....whatever. IT IS UNSTOPABLE.

And that thing you said about women being sexually ready in video games....well its not right, but you can see why they do it (it attracts men). After all are the majority of women going to play a game that has a man with an erect penis, erect nipples, and that look of seduction on his face...? Yeah I don't think so. You can use the fact that men are attracted to sexual things as some sort of debate that men are pigs; then again, you can also use it as something that gives power to women (the whole manipulating men through the usage of sex thing, like witches).

Some women even like the whole idea of the damsel of distress, like chivalry (women=weak, men=do all the work). What seems like sexism to someone doesn't mean someone else perceives it the same way. It's just a matter of opinions and perspectives......a never ending war.

 

[The Federation]

First thing's first, if you feel I am wrong and/or don't know what I'm talking about, post a comment of your own. Otherwise, if you are too scared to see your ideas challenged, you should probably refrain from any type of feedback on the issue whatsoever.

You have to agree that there is sexism and racism everywhere (women get it...men get it....blacks get it...Chinese....jewish...you name it)
I doubt you can stop all of it, and you have to look at the important things in sexism and racism, where people are actually getting hurt and not just in some video game.
Just my opinion anyway.

Sarkeesian has over 150k to spend however she wants, and she uses "all" of it on a reasearch program trying to dig up info on sexism in video games. It could be just me, but I really doubt she cares about video games or feminism, either one.

Trust me if you squint and look sideways everything is some sort of sexist, racist, religious offensive comment....whatever.

Exactly. Deconstructionism doesn't work if you a;ready have the end in mind while you are picking apart any topic. It's bias that makes Sark believe there is actually sexism in video games when there very clearly isn't any.

You can use the fact that men are attracted to sexual things as some sort of debate that men are pigs; then again, you can also use it as something that gives power to women (the whole manipulating men through the usage of sex thing, like witches).

Doesn't make men pigs, doesn't make women witches. It is all about perspective. We are one of many sexually dimorphic species, where the man tends to get most of the sex drive and the responsibility to attact a mate, while the female has an evolutionary imperative to be attractive in a number of different ways to atract the male. This is where the female "sexualization" and the male "utilitarianism" arguments to sexism come into play, when neither or biologically valid.

Some women even like the whole idea of the damsel of distress, like chivalry (women=weak, men=do all the work). What seems like sexism to someone doesn't mean someone else perceives it the same way. It's just a matter of opinions and perspectives......a never ending war.

DiD is not an issue in gaming, other than its use and utility being overused into today's era of gaming. It is a bland story arc, not a sexism one.

 

[Blazekickblaziken]

@McHearth I don'tt think any one is "funding sexism". Did you mean finding?

Also while it is true that sexism affects men as well as women, they aren't affected in the same ways. For example, supposing traditional gender roles. A man anda woman get married. The husband went to college and got a job, the woman may or may not have gotten a degree, but she becomes a housewife. 20 years later there's a death.

If it's the woman's death, the man has to go through the emotional turmoil, plus learning to care for himself. Cooking, cleaning, laundry...
If the man dies, the woman has to hope she gets a good pension. Aside from the emotional turmoil she has to now go find her place in the work force who might not want a 40 year old woman without any kind of work experience. This woman has to learn to survive.

Now I am aware this example is out dated and not analogous. But I just wanted to lay out a simple version of the different effects of sexism on the genders (standardized gender roles is a type of sexism).

Also, sexism isn't "sometimes" a double edged sword, it's "always" a double edged sword. It's just not applicable in the same ways.

@TheFederation

Just because sexism is "accidental" and "reflective of society" doesn't make it any less problematic. This isn't about the creator's intentions, this is about the creation itself. If it shows something sexist (even if only on accident), and it doesn't adress it, it will (and THIS is the important part) normalize it. I get, that in most cases, adressing the sexism would detract from the story line because that's not what the story is about, but that just means that element should probably not be added.

 

[The Federation]

@TheFederation

Just because sexism is "accidental" and "reflective of society" doesn't make it any less problematic. This isn't about the creator's intentions, this is about the creation itself. If it shows something sexist (even if only on accident), and it doesn't adress it, it will (and THIS is the important part) normalize it. I get, that in most cases, adressing the sexism would detract from the story line because that's not what the story is about, but that just means that element should probably not be added.

Like I said and have said before, my primary objection is that I don't see any sexism in the game in question. Beyond that, if there was, it's nature as "accidental" is not normalizing the issues because the issues are already normal. I guess this plays into my objection regarding the lack of sexism, but you can't normalize the normal.

If you were to take away anything that you percieve as sexist, most games would be about genderless amorphic blobs addressing other genderless amorphic blobs in an abstract, genderless world. Leaving in issues where females aren't being discriminated against but are unequal to men is normal, because we also leave in parts where men are unfavorably unequal to women. We already do leave out everything that is really an issue, like disproportionate pay and a cultural tolerance for rape.

 

[Lugia-sama]

Well I understand what you guys are getting at, but I thought she was spending money to try and change it or something. My thought was that even if she does spend money, it won't stop (and that she could be spending it on hunger or whatever). Guess I misunderstood the point of the post or something?

And that miniscule effect it has on society you were talking about Blaze. When feminism first reached its peak, weren't schools reformed in order to help females get better grades? I've heard debates saying that schools today are more geared toward female styles of learning (well in the US anyway) and that contributes to males not getting good scores ( not entirely sure it's true; feel free to correct me).
I realize the point of this is to reduce sexism toward females not males, just wanted to point out it happens in many ways, not just video games and some things are better worth the time and effort to solve ( concerning sexism).

The point concerning that females always look attractive in video games while men don't could have an adverse effect on males, that they are inferior to females or should not care about health, nutrition, etc. Although maybe the effect on females is worse, as they feel pressured to get surgical operations or some sort of food disorder ( of course males might feel pressured to look better to keep all those hot females from video games interested in them; sense of inferiority). All so intertwined and confusing, yeah?

 

[Blazekickblaziken]

@McHeart

She started a kickstarter to fund her newest series, the one being discussed here. It has the aim to educate people about the problems these tropes pose. To say that someone is funding sexism is to say that someone is giving money to be sexist. Which isn't what's going on.

Also, saying that she should be spending her money on fighting world hunger instead of fighting sexism is pretty ignorant.this world has many problems with inequality, and there is no one thing that is the "Most" important. Should we stop funding cancer reasearch because we could use it for food? Or AIDS research?

@TheFederation

Are you really going to argue semantics? Fine, if you don't like the word "normalize" replace it with "reinforce". You seem to be missing the bigger point that it is normalizing/reinforcing problematic aspects of society. Which is bad.

Also I never said Pokemon was sexist, I stated the contrary. But that does not mean it doesn't have sexist aspects. And I reffered to three of them specifically. As a matter of fact, I'm even willing to forgive my whole complaint about Bianca (for those just tuning in, it has to do with power dynamics), since her storyline wasn't sexist per se, I'm just annoyed the first true female rival got that storyline. If you took out the other things I mentioned you'd have
1) A prrof. Juniper without a dad (Like all the proffessors before her)
2) and more varied body types for female trainers.
That is literally all.

 

[Nightmareisalive]

Also I never said Pokemon was sexist, I stated the contrary. But that does not mean it doesn't have sexist aspects. And I reffered to three of them specifically. As a matter of fact, I'm even willing to forgive my whole complaint about Bianca (for those just tuning in, it has to do with power dynamics), since her storyline wasn't sexist per se, I'm just annoyed the first true female rival got that storyline. If you took out the other things I mentioned you'd have
1) A prrof. Juniper without a dad (Like all the proffessors before her)
2) and more varied body types for female trainers.
That is literally all.

Well any attempts on saying Pokemon is sexist is very naive and falls flat on its face anytime it is brought up.

1) Prof Juniper while may have to share the spotlight with her dad doesn't mean Pokemon is sexist towards female Prof. At least twice before that Prof Oak has either taken or shared in the spotlight with other gen Profs. In gen 2 you can talk to Oak before you even get your first badge and throughout the story-line you can hear Oak more than that gen Prof. Prof Elm had a lot of his attention taken away by Oak and once the player enters Kanto becomes replaced by Oak. Prof Rowan also suffered this when after the main story-line is done Oak pretty much takes over and it is him you have to go to to show how many Pokemon you caught and also get access to the bird trio. Was it necessary for Oak to appear and take attention away from the other Profs? No it wasn't but it happened anyway. Even though Prof Juniper had to share the spotlight with her dad she still played a big part in the story so if Pokemon was going to be sexist to her as soon as they introduced her father she would of hardly got a mention but that didn't happen.

2) Pokemon is pretty much has stereotypes for its character design. Look at each trainer class and you will see it does it for each different trainer. The miner class for example looks what people see a miner as which is also same for the Ace trainer class. Both the girl and boy Ace trainer are good looking and since ace is usually seen as the Ace (to be good looking and cool) by people of course they are going to be good looking. Also look outside other female trainer class and you will see they do have a variety of body types for the female trainer.

3) Bianca still has a big part in the in game story line. She teaches the player how to catch Pokemon and does help them out along the way. Her path was decided on her personilty and what she decided to do at the end of Black/White. Also being an Ad to a Prof can be seen just as big an honour as being a Gym Leader or even bigger since it means they can also become Profs who are highly respected in the Pokemon world.

Pokemon also gives a lot of respect to its female trainers. For example Cynthia is most fan's favorite, has the toughest team and biggest contribution to the story than other Champions. Her role in the game is bigger than other champions and interacts with the player more so throughout the game than other Champions have. Without her it would be impossible to complete the game without her help. More so than other Champions who while they may interact with the player doesn't help them that much.

 

[Jb]

Pokemon also gives a lot of respect to its female trainers. For example Cynthia is most fan's favorite, has the toughest team and biggest contribution to the story than other Champions. Her role in the game is bigger than other champions and interacts with the player more so throughout the game than other Champions have. Without her it would be impossible to complete the game without her help. More so than other Champions who while they may interact with the player doesn't help them that much.

You know the same can be said for Blue, and Lance. Hell, even Steven.

 

[Nightmareisalive]

You know the same can be said for Blue, and Lance. Hell, even Steven.

That's true it could be said for them. But Blue's contribution to the player came mostly when he was a rival after he became champion you only had to beat him that was it. Him as champion didn't help the player out. Steven I don't think was introduced as champion and when we discovered he was champion he still didn't play a big role against the bad guys than other champions have. Lance while he did help the player out a lot still wasn't there for the final bit against the evil team unlike Cynthia. Of course all their contribution can be debated.

 

[The Federation]

Are you really going to argue semantics? Fine, if you don't like the word "normalize" replace it with "reinforce". You seem to be missing the bigger point that it is normalizing/reinforcing problematic aspects of society. Which is bad.

Normalization and reinforcement are seperate nd distinct terms. Displaying in game what is the status quo in reality is a null position. My argument is that accidental "sexism" (or, to be realistic, clearly depicting men and women with their unique traits as is in reality) doesn't exist, because a game with no position that makes a world based on the status quo cannot possibly be sexist.

Also I never said Pokemon was sexist, I stated the contrary.

Good, I never suggested you thought the entire game was sexist either. Glad to clear that up.

But that does not mean it doesn't have sexist aspects. And I reffered to three of them specifically. As a matter of fact, I'm even willing to forgive my whole complaint about Bianca (for those just tuning in, it has to do with power dynamics), since her storyline wasn't sexist per se, I'm just annoyed the first true female rival got that storyline. If you took out the other things I mentioned you'd have
1) A prrof. Juniper without a dad (Like all the proffessors before her)
2) and more varied body types for female trainers.
That is literally all.

The Juniper issue is a clear nitpick and the body types of female characters are all justified and understandable. Which sprites specifically are you talking about, compared to which male sprites? Having played every single Pokemon game ever released, I know pretty well that females and males don't have any visible gap in "sexiness". Back to Juniper for a second so I don't just dismiss it, what was your reasoning regarding Juniper's disempowerment(?)?

 

[Nightmareisalive]

Back to Juniper for a second so I don't just dismiss it, what was your reasoning regarding Juniper's disempowerment(?)?

I think his reasoning for it was that she had to share the spotlight as Prof with her father who is also called Prof Juniper. It goes on the idea that since she is a female Prof forced to share the spotlight with a male Prof she is dis-empowered since it takes attention away from her. As I already pointed out other Prof's had also suffered from this and them being male didn't change that fact in the slightest.

 

[matt0044]

You know the same can be said for Blue, and Lance. Hell, even Steven.

Lance only helped with the Lake of Rage incident.

 

[Jb]

Lance only helped with the Lake of Rage incident.

What's you point?

 

[matt0044]

What's you point?

I'm just pointing that tidbit out.

 

[Nightmareisalive]

no, pokemon does have sexism. just because you like it doesn't mean it isn't sexist. stop

OK so who was the one who gave this to me as rep? Why not just say it on this topic and explain why it has sexism instead of just giving a half heart message. If you really cared about the subject you would be more than willing to talk about it on this topic instead of just sending a rep. And why should I stop? Clearly you don't like what I'm saying but don't want to explain yourself so your hiding behind rep.

Going on from this Pokemon does not have sexism. The only way there is sexism is in Pokemon is founded by people who are desperate to prove that it exists in Pokemon. By looking at the smallest of things and ignoring how other characters are treated and then blowing it out of proportion it is possible to make it exist in Pokemon. As I already explained the female characters don't get treated any differently than their male counter-parts.

 

[The Federation]

OK so who was the one who gave this to me as rep?

Shhh... If someone gives you petty, logic-devoid rep you have to sit there, shut your mouth, and take it. If you say it out loud, that's against the rules. Wouldn't want to hurt the feelings of the brainless, spineless rep giver, yeah? Being able to hide and avoid all criticism is the point of the system. That's what people use it for, anyway.

Maybe the fact that I want to be able to discuss an issue rather than receive baseless criticism which I cannot respond to is a fault in my own character, though.

As I already explained the female characters don't get treated any differently than their male counter-parts.

The fact that people are willing to argue that there is sexism in a game developed, marketed, and sold with E for Everyone in mind is a sign that the claimant is willing to argue anything to prove sexism is an issue. If anyone on this site or anywhere can show gaming to have a specific role in female discriminatory gender stereotypes, I would love to see it. Until them, Sarkeesian is just whining because she knows it makes her money.

 

[bobandbill]

Shhh... If someone gives you petty, logic-devoid rep you have to sit there, shut your mouth, and take it. If you say it out loud, that's against the rules. Wouldn't want to hurt the feelings of the brainless, spineless rep giver, yeah? Being able to hide and avoid all criticism is the point of the system. That's what people use it for, anyway.

Maybe the fact that I want to be able to discuss an issue rather than receive baseless criticism which I cannot respond to is a fault in my own character, though.

Or you could read the first post of the trial rep system thread and realise that if there's a dumb rep, you can always report it to a mod which goes against your claim that the system is made to allow people to hide behind their words. (And after all, it's a trial.) Or if it isn't report worthy but you don't like getting negative rep, you could disable the system and/or just not care about a reputation system on a Pokemon forum.

But that's another topic. =p

I personally think that if there is any sexism in Pokemon it's mild at best - I'm struggling to see why points that are already made about it being there are very solid, and without any negatives in stereotypes or whatnot to male characters too in applying the same level of scrutiny. For instance I don't really feel that Juniper's father really took much away from her at all, and certainly not to the same extent as that glory-hogging Oak. Then again, compare Oak to say Birch or Elm...

And the Gym Leaders/E4 members always had relatively healthy numbers of female trainers (going off memory, Kanto has 3/4 leaders depending on the gen, Johto has 3 [maybe plus Bugsy =p], Hoenn with 4 (twins counted as one), Sinnoh with 4, Unova with 3/4 (with one becoming the Champion later on). As for the E4 there's at least one, usually 2 ignoring the champion. It's slightly skewered to males overall, but not by a significant margin.

I'd also say that Cynthia is the most 'represented' champion out of them all (in DP, much more in Platinum in a role, appears in a special event in HGSS, and even gets special appearances in the following gen), although a few others (Lance, Alder) are not too far behind.

 

[The Federation]

Or you could read the first post of the trial rep system thread and realise that if there's a dumb rep, you can always report it to a mod which goes against your claim that the system is made to allow people to hide behind their words. (And after all, it's a trial.) Or if it isn't report worthy but you don't like getting negative rep, you could disable the system and/or just not care about a reputation system on a Pokemon forum.

Or maybe I have read the first post and understand that rep doesn't have to be against the rules to be stupid and a detractor from discussion. Trial or not, why is my criticism not valid? It's human nature to care about being insulted, even if its dumb or menial in nature, and I have already turned off rep. The fact is, it's easy to disagree with someone, bud hard to explain why and weather criticism, and rep gives you an anonymous out so you don't have to actually understand the issue you tell others they are wrong about.

But that's another topic. =p

Another topic that people would baselessly criticize you for without posting their PoV. Thanks for actually doing so, by the way.

I personally think that if there is any sexism in Pokemon it's mild at best - I'm struggling to see why points that are already made about it being there are very solid, and without any negatives in stereotypes or whatnot to male characters too in applying the same level of scrutiny.

Sexism in video games is a first world issue in general. If your main quarrel with society is video games and movies, you don't have a problem worth talking about. Unless you convince thousands of others how much of a victim they are and they parrot you for all they're worth...