• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Objectification & Slut Shaming: Where Do You Draw The Line?

T

That1BlackGuy

Member
The question is pretty self explanatory but for some context you can read on.

This thread is inspired by some old Neogaf threads I've been reading concerning aspects of this issue in which the community has discussed things concerning female characters in video games and the different facets that accompanies this subject i.e. fanservice, objectification, slut shaming, sexualization, empowerment, inclusiveness, etc. So for this thread I wanted to zoom in on a specific area of this discussion which is less focused on the subject itself and more focused on the individual preferences with concern to how you critique aspects of this subject, and that subject being good female characters in video games, the traits that accompany that and/or sexual expression.

For the wording of the title I tried to go for something related in some aspects yet conflicting when applied in certain situations. Now yes you can say "you can't slut shame video game characters because they have no agency, they're just polygons" then with all due respect your opponent can also likely make a similar case for objectification if this issue were to be simplified in such a manner so I hope we can avoid that and focus on the topic.

Finally, if you made it this far then please understand that there is no wrong answer here. I am simply curious about your honest stance when it comes to objectifying vs. empowerment. If you like games that feature hypersexualized women, fanservice and/or women in revealing clothing (whether it is contextual or not) that's fine. If you take strong issue with those elements or design choices that is just as valid. What I am saying is please be respectful of others opinions as I know this can be somewhat of a hot topic for some.

Extra Note: I also want to state that this thread wasn't inspired by the recent Bayonetta and sexualization thread (haven't read it yet but based on the title I'd assume its self explanatory) if the discussion in that thread completely invalidates this one then the mods can lock this thread if they wish.
 
Unlike the Knights of Social Injustice™ I don't apply real world politics to videogames because at the end of the day you have to take a long look in the mirror and realize you are applying your own real life problems/agenda(whatever it may be) to a bunch of fucking non-existent pixels.

A friend of mine once joked(about 10 years ago) that The Mushroom Kingdom is possibly a form of genocide or gentrification because the "toad(stool)s" are just the evolution or the "Rich White People" version of the goombas(the poor, less well-off toadstools). Then he went on explain that argument in GREAT DETAIL. It blew my mind. But at the end of the day, we were just joking and both laughed it off.

Videogames exist in a vaccum. Just because the graphics get better and the characters look more and more like real people doesn't change that.

I used to love Destructoid back in 2007 when their motto was "STFUAJPG(STFU and Just Play Games)" and even Dtoid has moved away from that in favor of clickbait/pagehits with the whole social justice thing.

Whatever happened to just enjoying videogames? :/
 
Well, I think the issue is that while you say there is no wrong answer, there kinda is. You have two choices when you respond to this thread. You can either play it super safe and not piss anyone off, or your post is risky and maybe bannable. I don't think anyone should risk a ban for this, but I don't think the mods should allow any opinions to fly, as some could be highly offensive.

Simply put, I think this is a very hard topic to tell people with such varying stances to discuss in a civil way where they don't step on each others toes.

Edit: So basically what I'm saying is- its hard for people to be respectful on the basis their opinion may be disrespectful to someone else in this thread regardless of the fact its their honest opinion.
 
Is it a real person deciding what she is wearing ?

Slut shaming.

It is a character designed by other people in clothing that does not makes sense ?

Objectification
 
Sure, it's pretty simple, really:

If I were that person, would I rationally decide that that outfit is a good idea to wear?

Amazingly, a LOT of developers never even think about this question; they just stick their female characters in bizarre metal bikinis, give them boob plate, cleavage windows, etc., etc. purely for the sake of male (and homosexual female) eye candy without even giving it a second a thought. There are so many uncomfortable, impractical, or downright stupid outfits made explicitly for sex appeal out there that it's mind-boggling.

Now, with Bayonetta in particular, she's actually a fairly well-realized character in terms of owning her own sexuality and having a rational reason to have skin showing. It's so ridiculous and over-the-top that it's hard for me to take it even halfway seriously.

Most other depictions, however, are not so forgivable. Any time I see boob plate, cleavage windows, a random piece of armor missing, or... well, hell, just go look at female armor bingo to see the many absurd varieties of transgression there are against female characters and their outfits. Pretty sad, really. We still have quite a ways to go in this regard.
Ramstein said:
Videogames exist in a vaccum.
Click to expand...
Er... no. No, they don't.

This whole post is remarkably regressive and insecure.
 
Not too interested in joining this discussion, but objectification of women and slut shaming are two very different ideas.
 
Ramstein said:
Whatever happened to just enjoying videogames? :/
Click to expand...

What I don't get about this argument is how does discussing these topics stop you from enjoying games.

I do fall on the side that human sexuality should be a subject that should be freely explored.
 
Teremap said:
If I were that person, would I rationally decide that that outfit is a good idea to wear?
Click to expand...

This is one thing that always confused me in the case of when they wouldn't. Who decided at a development team that it was a good idea to do it. I mean when you think about the fact someone actually had to go out of their way to say such a design should be there in comparison to normal clothes, it's more creepy than anything else.
 
i don't draw the line at all. i'm pretty much fine with everything.

Teremap said:
There are so many uncomfortable, impractical, or downright stupid outfits
Click to expand...

they just works

zvlA0BO.png
 
Ramstein said:
Unlike the Knights of Social Injustice™ I don't apply real world politics to videogames because at the end of the day you have to take a long look in the mirror and realize you are applying your own real life problems/agenda(whatever it may be) to a bunch of fucking non-existent pixels.

A friend of mine once joked(about 10 years ago) that The Mushroom Kingdom is possibly a form of genocide or gentrification because the "toad(stool)s" are just the evolution or the "Rich White People" version of the goombas(the poor, less well-off toadstools). Then he went on explain that argument in GREAT DETAIL. It blew my mind. But at the end of the day, we were just joking and both laughed it off.

Videogames exist in a vaccum. Just because the graphics get better and the characters look more and more like real people doesn't change that.

I used to love Destructoid back in 2007 when their motto was "STFUAJPG(STFU and Just Play Games)" and even Dtoid has moved away from that in favor of clickbait/pagehits with the whole social justice thing.

Whatever happened to just enjoying videogames? :/
Click to expand...

Video games do not exist in a vacuum. They are a part of our culture like anything else and they both reflect and influence our ideas about various things.
 
Ramstein said:
Unlike the Knights of Social Injustice™ I don't apply real world politics to videogames because at the end of the day you have to take a long look in the mirror and realize you are applying your own real life problems/agenda(whatever it may be) to a bunch of fucking non-existent pixels.

A friend of mine once joked(about 10 years ago) that The Mushroom Kingdom is possibly a form of genocide or gentrification because the "toad(stool)s" are just the evolution or the "Rich White People" version of the goombas(the poor, less well-off toadstools). Then he went on explain that argument in GREAT DETAIL. It blew my mind. But at the end of the day, we were just joking and both laughed it off.

Videogames exist in a vaccum. Just because the graphics get better and the characters look more and more like real people doesn't change that.

I used to love Destructoid back in 2007 when their motto was "STFUAJPG(STFU and Just Play Games)" and even Dtoid has moved away from that in favor of clickbait/pagehits with the whole social justice thing.

Whatever happened to just enjoying videogames? :/
Click to expand...

The brains have arrived and broke your toy. What a shame....
 
Platy said:
Is it a real person deciding what she is wearing ?

Slut shaming.

It is a character designed by other people in clothing that does not makes sense ?

Objectification
Click to expand...

Exactly. A fictional character cannot feel shame, so you don't have to worry about insulting their feelings by saying their outfit is inappropriate or obviously made to cater to male fantasy.

I always, without fail, see this brought up when someone criticizes the design of a female character. "You're crying about equal representation yet you're allowed to judge a girl based on what she wears?" No, I'm judging a drawing made by a man based on what it wears. Bonus points when it's an underage anime character and the defender gets in a huff about how it's me who is sexualizing the character by pointing out that they're only teenagers and it's me seeing them as sexual. Ugh.
 
I don't draw the line since they are just polygons and make-believes. Some time, the theme can be empowerment of sexuality or objectification of men/women. But in the end, they are just videogame characters.

In real life, if you get paid to do a job then it is fine in my book. People sign up to be captivated for the audience.
People want to dress up in a nice and sexy outfit to represent their empowerment and good look.

At the end of the day, getting paid for your look is winning at life.
I rank successful gold diggers/strippers/escorts pretty high on my list of great motivators and hustlers.
To have someone enthralled by your look, wisdom, or personality that they are willing to give their fortune/life away takes a lot of skill.
 
Why are there constantly threads bashing games in concern with the way that girls & women dress, but not threads about bashing guns & violence in games?

The hypocrisy amazes me. Video games aren't exactly real life at all.
 
For me, it depends on context. It seems to make sense for Bayonetta as she's an incredibly sexual being, and I have no problem with that. Other cases.... for example, the revealing outfits in the new Fatal Frame game are more objectionable, because they seemingly have little to do with the plot and are purely there for titilation.
 
Just like violence in video games, I don't think that sexism in video games affects us in real life. It is unfortunate that minorities don't get enough representation in games, but I wouldn't judge an individual game based on that. I think bad writing/character design is bad regardless of whether it is applied to a man and woman, and I don't think sexualized immediately means badly written/designed. It's a case by case basis.
 
I think there is still a lot of minsunderstanding about how this affects other people. It seems that many people just say, "I'm not bothered by the woman wearing hardly anything, having a flat personality, and being there just for heterosexual male titillation, so I don't see what the problem is." People need to learn about empathy. It makes some women uncomfortable, and it makes some men uncomfortable. If it keeps being brought up, and it makes a lot of people upset, isn't that a problem? I think the answer is pretty clear.

I'm not always sure whether something is going too far, though. I suppose that could be pretty grey.
 
III-V said:
Not too interested in joining this discussion, but objectification of women and slut shaming are two very different ideas.
Click to expand...

The point of the OP is that an openly sexualised woman would find herself ideologically condemned by BOTH the misogynistic concept of slut-shaming AND ALSO condemned by the feminist abhorrence of the objectification of women.

Because human sexuality is a personal and complex issue that isn't easily categorised into one ideological camp or another. Fuck, Billy Bragg says it best.
 
I don't have any lines. No rules. No right or wrong. Nothing. Fiction is free. And you can't control what's inside people's heads, but you can affect them, making them scared of expressing certain things.

I can buy games for sex appeal only, and I love objectification of sexy girls. Others are my opposite, but I still respect them. People are very different, and as a result, there are so many different types of characters in games.

Please let it be that way.
 
I used to care, but it has been beaten out of me by everyone else on the internet. I couldn't care less at this point. I just want to play a good game.
 
Lolicon said:
I don't have any lines. No rules. No right or wrong. Nothing. Fiction is free. And you can't control what's inside people's heads, but you can affect them, making them scared of expressing certain things.

I can buy games for sex appeal only, and I love objectification of sexy girls. Others are my opposite, but I still respect them. People are very different, and as a result, there are so many different types of characters in games.

Please let it be that way.
Click to expand...

ehe
 
Biker19 said:
Why are there constantly threads bashing games in concern with the way that girls & women dress, but not threads about bashing guns & violence in games?

The hypocrisy amazes me. Video games aren't exactly real life at all.
Click to expand...
The problem is not sexuality (and if you've been told it is, you're listening to the wrong people). The problem is fairness and equality. That's it.

Right now 90% of female characters are sexualized in some (usually dumb and impractical) way, compared to some 10% of male characters. The imbalance is massive.
nynt9 said:
Just like violence in video games, I don't think that sexism in video games affects us in real life. It is unfortunate that minorities don't get enough representation in games, but I wouldn't judge an individual game based on that. I think bad writing/character design is bad regardless of whether it is applied to a man and woman, and I don't think sexualized immediately means badly written/designed. It's a case by case basis.
Click to expand...
It's not about whether or not it affects us. It's about whether or not it's fair or equitable to the marginalized genders.

Women, transpeople, and people outside the binary gender norm get loads of shit IRL on a regular basis. We don't need our video games compounding the problem by making it difficult for people to escape in them because of dumb and stupid sexist elements.
 
Taste and moderation are what matters. I would not hold a game to a different standard in how it portrays an establishment like prostitution than I would a TV show or movie. As long as the content is consistent with its age rating, developers should make what they want to make, and depict what they wish to depict.

That isn't to say some of it isn't stupid. The way Dead or Alive characters look has always been ridiculous. But it doesn't offend me, it just makes me laugh at the absurdity of it. Then, if trends prevail, I get to laugh at twitter commentary on the ensuing Ben Kuchera article.
 
Honestly my answer to the imbalance of male and female objectification is that there should be more games exploring male sexuality.
 
Ramstein said:
Unlike the Knights of Social Injustice™
Click to expand...
I'm a Social Justice Rogue (tm), thank you very much.

But, I'd be okay with Social Justice Ninja or Social Justice Samurai, too. Because they're just plain cool.

Videogames exist in a vaccum.
Click to expand...
Of course. Just like movies, paintings, music, literature, and TV.

*facepalm*

Whatever happened to just enjoying videogames? :/
Click to expand...
Yeah. You can't ever criticize video games tropes and art direction decisions and still enjoy video games. It is known.

You can, of course, criticize gameplay, framerates, poly-counts, clipping geometry, animations, map design, mission design, story and plot, character development, and just about everything else and still enjoy video games, mind.

Just not these, uh, other things.

Teremap said:
Sure, it's pretty simple, really:

If I were that person, would I rationally decide that that outfit is a good idea to wear?

Amazingly, a LOT of developers never even think about this question; they just stick their female characters in bizarre metal bikinis, give them boob plate, cleavage windows, etc., etc. purely for the sake of male (and homosexual female) eye candy without even giving it a second a thought. There are so many uncomfortable, impractical, or downright stupid outfits made explicitly for sex appeal out there that it's mind-boggling.

Now, with Bayonetta in particular, she's actually a fairly well-realized character in terms of owning her own sexuality and having a rational reason to have skin showing. It's so ridiculous and over-the-top that it's hard for me to take it even halfway seriously.

Most other depictions, however, are not so forgivable. Any time I see boob plate, cleavage windows, a random piece of armor missing, or... well, hell, just go look at female armor bingo to see the many absurd varieties of transgression there are against female characters and their outfits. Pretty sad, really. We still have quite a ways to go in this regard.
Er... no. No, they don't.

This whole post is remarkably regressive and insecure.
Click to expand...
Agreed on all counts.


III-V said:
Not too interested in joining this discussion, but objectification of women and slut shaming are two very different ideas.
Click to expand...
That too.
 
Biker19 said:
Why are there constantly threads bashing games in concern with the way that girls & women dress, but not threads about bashing guns & violence in games?

The hypocrisy amazes me. Video games aren't exactly real life at all.
Click to expand...

I have never once understood why this is a hypocrisy, and no one has explained it to me. Why is that a contradiction? Why does being alright with violence automatically make it so you have to be okay with sexually explicit content, and vice versa? Equate the two to me, I'm genuinely curious.
 
I wish the "why is violence OK?" defense would just go away. Most violent games usually have you being assailed and put into a position where you either have to kill in self defense or get killed.
 
If some confused insecure people decide that polygon creations are an avatar of their sex and are offended because they identify with fictional creations the joke really is on them. To be honest I regard these people and their first world problems the same way as I look at mental patients, minus the sympathy of course.

I draw no line, not in real life nor in fiction, then again I was not raised in that particular part of the world whose cultural tits brainwash those who suckle into being self entitled creatures that get off on being perpetually offended by everything.
 
I'm all in favour of objectification and hyper-sexualisation in video games. I can't think of any game that wouldn't be better if the main character was a woman with porn star proportions, very few clothes, and heels so high that they need little lights on the top to warn passing planes.

If I'm going to spend a lot of time looking at a human, my preference will always be for an attractive woman.
 
Pop-O-Matic said:
I wish the "why is violence OK?" defense would just go away. Most violent games usually have you being assailed and put into a position where you either have to kill in self defense or get killed.
Click to expand...

You do actually realise that the choice to make a videogame where the primary interaction with the created world is via a knife or a gun is just as much an artificial construct as choosing whether to give the main character big tits and put her in a bikini, right?
 
I honestly have no clear cut mental line in regards to this, I simply react according to what I see and its context. I think Catherine is a fantastic game with a really great story, but I also think Bayonetta is really trashy and tasteless in a way that turns me off of the game. One is sexy with purpose (social commentary and a core element of the plot and themes the game presents) and the other seems purposeless to me. I think Quiet from MGSV and Cia from Hyrule Warriors both look fucking ridiculous, but I actually quite like EVA in MGS3.

It just depends on the context and design for me. It's not really a textbook thing.
 
animlboogy said:
It's applying an actual American quirk to some other issue that makes zero sense. It is indeed strange that Americans are fine with heads being blown off, but as soon as someone's scrotum or vulva are visible, that product is no longer welcome in the mainstream marketplace. Hell, a nip-slip is more than enough for most people. That has nothing to do with representations of women in games, of course.
Click to expand...

Exactly. And it gets old.

If people are gonna bash sexuality in video games, then they should do the same for bashing guns & brutal violence in games too. It's only fair.
 
Zeyphersan said:
I have never once understood why this is a hypocrisy, and no one has explained it to me. Why is that a contradiction? Why does being alright with violence automatically make it so you have to be okay with sexually explicit content, and vice versa? Equate the two to me, I'm genuinely curious.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I never understood this either. It comes up every fucking time a game has a ridiculous design in it, too.
 
Soulflarz said:
Well, I think the issue is that while you say there is no wrong answer, there kinda is. You have two choices when you respond to this thread. You can either play it super safe and not piss anyone off, or your post is risky and maybe bannable. I don't think anyone should risk a ban for this, but I don't think the mods should allow any opinions to fly, as some could be highly offensive.

Simply put, I think this is a very hard topic to tell people with such varying stances to discuss in a civil way where they don't step on each others toes.

Edit: So basically what I'm saying is- its hard for people to be respectful on the basis their opinion may be disrespectful to someone else in this thread regardless of the fact its their honest opinion.
Click to expand...

I completely understand where you're coming from, no matter what you say you're likely going to offend someone out there but I still think showing a degree of respect, agreeing to disagree (and walking away if things get heated) are perfectly valid options when engaging in these types of discussions. From the threads I've read in the past concerning this issue the moderators were very laxed in what they allowed to fly as long as you were respectful and didn't attack anyone. Again I see where you're coming from but rest assured I didn't make this thread with the intention of trying to get anyone banned.

MrNyarlathotep said:
The point of the OP is that an openly sexualised woman would find herself ideologically condemned by BOTH the misogynistic concept of slut-shaming AND ALSO condemned by the feminist abhorrence of the objectification of women.

Because human sexuality is a personal and complex issue that isn't easily categorised into one ideological camp or another. Fuck, Billy Bragg says it best.
Click to expand...

This is what I was trying to illustrate, thank you for saying it better than I could.
 
I don't care one bit. If the game is fun to play, and the world makes sense within its own internal logic (which could be no logic, that's fine), than I'm cool with it. Creators should be able to do whatever they want in any genre or any form of media, and anything else is censorship and political correctness.
 
I like it when it's just there for fun or as cheesecake. It only really bothers me when the game attempts to self-rationalize it. Like Quiet in the upcoming MGS game, or Catherine was another.

If you revel in what you do it can be fun and silly, but justifying it feels very gross.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Game character ethnicities/sex - Where do you draw the line between anti-woke and racist pushback?
2 3 4 5 6
257
13K
Doom85 replied
Where Do I Buy Steam Codes
23
350
CrimsonTide replied
What do you prioritise the most about gaming?
2
71
369
taylorr56 replied
Do you consider the DKC trilogy very hard?
2
57
438
rodrigolfp replied
Do you feel the OG RE4 has more “soul” than the remake?
2 3
133
235
Madflavor replied
Top Bottom