Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[GlyphGryph]

Actually I seem to recall that I claimed ostracizing people is often ineffective, not that it's wrong. I'd appreciate not being told what I believe, thanks.

I wasn't putting you on that side. You are on the other side - you just don't believe this particular method of stopping people from doing a bad thing is an effective one most of the time.

[scriver]

That's pretty much been the point of everyone on "that side" of thr argument, Glyph.

Also posting to watch.

[Neonivek]

Bay12: Where threads about homosexuality in games are derailed by pages and pages of rape discussion.

It isn't a derail now that the topic creator officially shifting it.

Now it is a topic shift.

[MDFification]

Here's a good quote relating to the topic; "As long as war is regarded as wicked, it will always have its fascination. When it is looked upon as vulgar, it will cease to be popular." So sayeth Oscar Wilde, whose relation to me shall henceforth be used to (with little justification)  ignore the fact that I'm a CIS White Male intruding in this thread. Also disclosure; me and several members of my family been sexually harassed several times over my life but didn't find it particularly traumatic, so if I'm speaking too bluntly about it and offending people I apologize, it's from that bias and is unintentional.

Some kinds of sexual harassment (calling all sexual harassment rape seems like it cheapens the word to me... physically forcing yourself on a person is a different thing from emotional abuse), specifically sex with the intoxicated, cat-calling, butt-slapping etc. can and probably eventually will be stigmatized to the point that a properly socialized person would never consider them. They seem part-way there already.

Physical rape on the other hand won't be resolved through ostracization. Rape is observed in many species, including many unsocial ones. I'm going to say then that it's innate, and the potential for a person to become a rapist will always exist, as will the potential to become a murderer/thief etc. Note that neither of those two crimes are actually tied to a person's economic class (a Victorian fallacy) and are in fact pretty consistent amongst the population.
Saying that we in the Westmost Western West should teach our children not to rape seems kind of dumb to me. If we had a culture that considered rape (again, I'm not using this as a blanket term for sexual harassment) acceptable, such as in South Africa (where it's considered a 'cure' for lesbianism... ugh), then yes, education would be a big deal. But in a culture that doesn't actively encourage rape and views it as a crime, raising your child to have innate moral quams with raping (alongside things like murder) is something any good parent already does.

Teaching people to treat rape as less of a life-ending event, however, would work wonders. People would find it easier to recover emotionally from rape and better reporting would lead to more convictions of rapists. Not that I'm saying 'trivialize rape'; the action itself should be considered despicable and dangerous, the perpetrators considered pathetic and locked away from society for the safety of others. I just think that our current response (victim blaming, treating rape victims as if they're a different person after they've been assaulted, supporting a culture of fear which makes the assault more traumatic for the victims) is really counter productive for ensuring the least damage possible to the victims.

Again sorry if anyone gets offended by this, it's an opinion that if misinterpreted makes me look like a pretty horrible person.

[Arx]

such as in South Africa (where it's considered a 'cure' for lesbianism... ugh)

Wait, what? Link? I've never heard of that, and if it is a thing, I'd like to have heard about it. That sounds terrible.

[Glowcat]

such as in South Africa (where it's considered a 'cure' for lesbianism... ugh)

Wait, what? Link? I've never heard of that, and if it is a thing, I'd like to have heard about it. That sounds terrible.

"Curing lesbianism" i.e. "corrective rape" like that isn't limited to South Africa. It's part of the wider rape culture which is being criticized.

[Arx]

I've heard about that, but I've never heard it advocated here, by anyone, ever. That might just be because I'm bad at news, but I dunno.

[MDFification]

such as in South Africa (where it's considered a 'cure' for lesbianism... ugh)

Wait, what? Link? I've never heard of that, and if it is a thing, I'd like to have heard about it. That sounds terrible.

Regrettably, the rape culture in South Africa (considered to have the highest rates of rape in the world, though statistics are questionable, generally speaking) is so extant that it's not even considered controversial to point it out any more. Here's backup to the statement about so-called 'corrective' rape, which horrifyingly enough is estimated by some to happen 10 times per day in South Africa alone. The most disgusting thing to me is that it's not even recognized as a hate crime.

@Glowcat: The reason I single out South Africa is because it's the most extreme case for this brand of rape. It might be the most extreme case in terms of all forms of rape per capita, but almost all statistics about the prevalence of rape world-wide are questionable, facing differing standards (for example, in some jurisdictions if you're raped by your partner numerous times but only report it once, it's legally considered one rape) and chronic under-reporting due to social stigma.

I don't believe there's evidence that all areas have a rape culture, nor all groups. Each culture/subculture, however you define that, has its own perception of rape and the perception that there's this monolithic rape cult on a global scale (not saying you're saying that, it's just a popular perception) strikes me as counterproductive to addressing what issues we feasibly can.

[Arx]

Thanks for the link. The fact that a lot of it is township culture explains why I didn't know about it. I am frequently disturbed by how differently different parts of the country work...

[Vector]

.

[Sappho]

I was planning to avoid looking in this topic because it’s a sensitive subject for me. Now, I’ve decided that I do have something to say, and although I have no interest in getting involved in a conversation about rape culture (again, very sensitive subject for me), I’m just going to go ahead and leave my comments about the original topic of this thread right here.

Basically, I just want to ask the majority of the folks on here to take a moment to imagine something. I mean, really, no arguments, no anger, just… close your eyes for a moment and allow yourself to imagine actually being in one of these situations.

Spoiler: If you’re male… (click to show/hide)

Imagine you live in a world where 99% of video game characters are female. It’s always been that way. When you got your first video game system as a kid, all the playable characters were female. Sure, there were male characters in the background, but they didn’t usually speak. You certainly couldn’t *be* one of them. If you wanted to play a video game, you almost always had to play a girl.

Imagine that over the years you start to see a few male characters pop up here and there. Sweet, you think, I’ll get to play as a guy for once! Well, yes, but playing a male character generally means being a barbarian and no other class. Also, your “armor” consists of nothing but an enormous codpiece. I mean, seriously, there must be a boa constrictor in there or something. Your body is always hairless and muscular, and your character is ALWAYS striking the sexiest possible pose. Usually, the only function of this character is eye candy for the ladies. In the story, he probably serves solely as a love interest, or as a caricature of pure violence and animal instinct. Not much room for intelligence or sophistication when it comes to male characters. On the rare occasion that there’s more than one male in the story, they usually just spend the whole time fighting over a girl. Or in the more saucy games, they might get involved in a little guy-on-guy flirtation, a little titillation for the girls to enjoy. They don’t get to do a whole lot of saving the world or any of that stuff. That stuff is for girls.

So mostly, you play girls. Not sexy, scantily-clad girls. Sensibly dressed girls with broad interests and abilities. There are no boobies, there is no cleavage, no makeup. Just women getting shit done.

Imagine a conversation between two girls. “How come I can’t get my boyfriend to play video games with me?” “I dunno. Video games are just… kind of a girl thing I guess. Boys play sports and stuff.”

Eventually, guys start to realize that video games *aren’t* only fun for girls. They’re just… fun. But, understandably, guys aren’t terribly thrilled with *always* having to play a girl. I mean, guys make up almost half the people on the planet. What’s the deal with almost all the characters being female, and the male ones always just being ridiculous, 1-dimensional stereotypes?

And so men start to ask for more gender diversity in games. We want more male characters, they say. We want deeper, more complex characters. We’re tired of playing girls and barbarians and nothing else.

And the girls reply… so what? What’s the difference? It’s just a game. Why does it matter if the characters are male or female? I don’t see anything wrong with games just the way they are.

Spoiler: If you’re heterosexual… (click to show/hide)

Same story as above. The vast majority of characters in games are gay. I mean, pretty much all of them. You want to play a game? Better be up for all the romantic content of the stories to be homosexual. Don’t like watching two guys make out with each other? Well, then don’t play games. That’s just the way it is. Tired of all the heterosexual side characters being macho stereotypes who just want to play football and make babies? Want to play a story with a relationship you might actually be able to relate to? Well, go make your own game then, if it’s so important to you. All the gay gamers don’t see any problem with the situation as it is. What difference does it make if the characters are gay or straight? It’s just a game.

Spoiler: If you’re white… (click to show/hide)

All the characters are black (or Hispanic, or Asian, take your pick and fill in the blanks accordingly). If you want to play a game, your character is going to be black. Otherwise, the gameplay is the same. No real difference here, actually. Well, except that rare white character you see on the sidelines. The racist, slave-owning redneck. Most of the dialogue of white characters consists of phrases like “YEE-HAW!” and “Git er dun!” 99% of the time, white characters are the enemy. They’re the ones you need to kill. They’re evil business leaders sending wave after wave of white mercenaries at you. They’re slave owners you’re revolting against and slaughtering. Very rare to see a white protagonist, and even then, it’s almost always an absurd stereotype.

Do you care? Does it bother you? Sure, over the years a few games start adding in more developed white characters. But it’s a risky move. Games like that don’t always sell. And why should a game company put resources into making something more “diverse” when it’s selling just fine the way it is? This is what the players want, why change the formula?

There are plenty of other types of diversity, but you get the idea.

The point here is, if you’re in the majority, it’s easy to say “I don’t see any problem here. I don’t see why it matters.” It’s not enough to look for a reason why more diverse games would be objectively better for *you*, or why they might require diversity in order to succeed. That’s not the point. The point is that for everyone who isn’t just like you, games are fucking ridiculous. Playing a game where you can’t relate to any of the characters is a fundamentally different experience than playing one where you can. If you’re in the majority, you probably haven’t ever really been forced to experience that.

I don’t think people who say “games don’t need more diversity” are calling for ignorance or racism or sexism or any of that. I think it’s just a sign that they honestly don’t understand the issue at hand. Which is not their fault. You don’t choose to be in the majority any more than to be in the minority. But if you want to have a fair, rational, balanced conversation on this topic, it’s absolutely necessary to try to feel empathy for the other side. You MUST find a way to empathize. This doesn’t mean imagining a world with more diverse game characters and saying “yeah, so what? I don’t see that making any difference (to me).” It means imagining a world where YOU are in the minority, and everyone in the majority tells you that you don’t deserve to relate to your games the way they do.

As a non-heterosexual female who’s been gaming since the 80s, I fall into several minorities at the same time. I’ve spent my life having to play male characters, or scantily clad females that I find revolting. (When a man gets to choose his character’s facial hair, a woman gets to choose her MAKEUP. *shudder*) I’ve been forced to empathize with white heterosexual cis males my entire life, and having that empathy is not a bad thing. But they’ve never been forced to empathize with me. That needs to change. Not having empathy with an entire group of people makes it possible for the kind of “rape culture” you’ve all been discussing to exist.

That is all.

[palsch]

MDFification, I have a couple of substantial issues with your post. Going to spoiler this for extended discussion of rape.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Sex with the intoxicated (eg, people unable to consent) is rape. Not recognising it as such is a serious issue with how we educate people about rape.

One of my most linked blogs on the issue of rape and sexual assault is Yes means Yes, originally founded to promote a book of the same name. The reason for the name is moving towards an enthusiastic consent model. Basically the idea that consent is never assumed until it is explicitly given. It's in direct contradiction to the no-means-no tradition, which puts the emphasis on denying consent. Despite that consent never being extended in the first place.

A lot of this is due to socialisation. People are taught the no-means-no version because people (mostly men) are socialised to push boundaries in the hope that people will submit to them. It's not something explicitly taught, but implicitly passed on through culture in general. It also leads to all those falsely called "grey areas" around rape. People are taught not to seek consent but to avoid being told to stop.

We might not teach people to rape, but we sure as hell encourage behaviour that leads to rape, or borders on rape, or makes excuses for rape.

Teaching people not to rape means teaching better standards of consent. Teaching better recognition or what consent is and what rape is. And maybe even teaching respect for women outside their direct sexual worth to us (shocking concept I know).

It also means that other men take more responsibility for the actions of men around them, and act to prevent or condemn both rape and the environments that encourage it. But I'll come back to that.


I'd also be very careful about painting western culture as beyond considering rape acceptable. We aren't that far past marital rape being legal in many places (only made a crime in all 50 states in 1993, with remaining differences in legal standards between marital and other rapes to this day, and criminalised in the UK in 1991 by judicial review) and attitudes are still pretty fucked up;

In a survey of 11 to 14 year old boys and girls
 • 51% of the boys and 41% of the girls said forced sex was acceptable if the boy "spent a lot of money" on the girl
 • 31% of the boys and 32% of the girls said it was acceptable for a man to rape a woman with past sexual experiences
 • 65% of the boys and 47% of the girls said it was acceptable for a boy to rape a girl if they had been dating for more than six months
 
 In a survey of 13-14 year old boys:
 • 11% thought that if a girl said “no” to sex she really meant yes
 • More than 1 in 4 agreed that girls w ho get drunk at parties or on dates deserve whatever happens to them
 • Almost half felt that rape was sometimes the victim’s fault
 • 40% agreed that girls who wear sexy clothes are asking to be raped
 • More than 1 in 3 thought they would not be arrested if they forced a date to have sex
 • 36% agreed that if a girl goes into the bedroom on a date, she wants to have sex
 • More than 15% agreed that forcing your date to have sex is sometimes acceptable
 • More than 7% thought that it was okay for a boy to force a girl to have sex if the girl got him sexually excited
 
 In a survey of male college students, 1 in 5 said that forced sex was acceptable:
 • "if he spends money on her"
 • "if he is stoned or drunk"
 • "if they have been dating for a long time"

 1 of 12 male college students committed acts that met the legal definition of rape. 88% of men whose actions came under the legal definition of rape were adamant that their behavior did not constitute rape.

51% of male college students reported they might rape a woman if assured they would not get caught.

Add to this this post from the YmY blog that looks at self reporting rapists in college and this follow up which deals with methods and attitudes, both of rapists and bystanders. Which comes back to teaching both not to rape and how to avoid allowing rapes to happen.


When it comes to the 'life changing' part, mostly what Vector said. Only think I'd add is that it may be possible to change how rape victims are viewed, by avoiding falling into traps of policing female sexuality and viewing a woman's worth as related to her sexual history. The idea that a woman can have her social value damaged by a rape is extra baggage that can and should be addressed.

Late edit:
Complete tangent to the tangent, but an interesting article from an unexpected angle. Robert Rodriguez On Why He Launched a TV Network To Reflect Diversity In Front of And Behind The Camera.

When I was doing "Spy Kids," the Weinsteins asked me -- not that they were being jerks at all, they were just wondering -- "Why are you making the characters Hispanic? It doesn't make any sense, isn't this supposed to be for everybody?" "Well, it's based on my family."

They'd just never seen it. Hollywood is very much... no one wants to do it first, because what if they screw up? If someone else does it first and it's successful, then that's something we can imitate. It just makes business sense for people not to constantly be putting themselves out there.

[Weinstein] said that, and it really put me on the spot to come up with a reason. "Why not just give them American names? It's America, it will confuse people." I said "They are American -- they're based on my family, so they're Hispanic, but they're going to be speaking in English. It's going to be for everybody." But no one had done it before, so there was nothing to point to.

"But why?" They couldn't understand why I was doing it that way, and I couldn't come up with a good answer. And I realized, wow, if I wasn't Hispanic, I would have folded, I would have changed the name. That's why there weren't more scripts like that. Somebody would have asked them at some point "Why are you doing it that way?"

[MDFification]

@palsch
Sorry if my post implied sex with an impaired person isn't really rape. I've got plenty of friends who've had sex while drunk; for some people it was hardly a bump in the road, but for others it was devastating. You can't get consent from someone who isn't sober, the same way you can't really get consent from someone who isn't mentally/emotionally mature enough to evaluate the risks of sex.
Where I live, most of the sentiments expressed in the statistics you quoted are unthinkable. I realize fully that most people aren't fortunate enough to live somewhere like that.

@Vector
I'm not American, but those statistics still horrify me.
Equating cat-calling with rape is something I've never seen a person who wasn't a living example of Poe's Law say. I'm not trying to tell people who've been raped how they should feel, and appologize if it came off like that. I just think that people who feel vulnerable/live in a culture of fear suffer more trauma when victimized than people who feel empowered, and minimizing trauma to people is something we have no reason not to do.
Spoilers in case of triggering; my experience

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I got tricked into a rape van about 2 years ago on the way home from a party. I was pretty drunk, so I guess the people in question thought I'd be an easy target. I was lucky; the guy who actually tried to hold me down wasn't that much bigger than me, and I guess he didn't expect me to fight back. I hate hurting people, and honestly I scared myself fighting this guy; it's not a good feeling to realize you're fully willing and capable of beating someone to the point of death if you feel threatened. I got off having only been groped and basically skinning my arm from leaping out of a moving van. It could easily have been a lot worse. There were two guys in the back, and I think one of them was drunk because he really didn't react in time to stop me from jumping out.
I don't equate my experience with actual rape at all. I mean sure, it fucking destroyed my trust in people for a good while, but I can only imagine how much worse it would have been had I felt powerless. I also don't remember tons of it, which can't help me understand any better - for example, I'm pretty sure I knew one of the rapists, but I can't remember who they were. I used to have a pretty big substance abuse problem. It also helped that basically the same thing happened to my dad (a lot worse things have happened to him over his life, actually; I'm kind of in awe of the man. He's had friends die in front of him, try and fail to save his girlfriend from drowning, and still comes off as a confident, secure person) which I admire with all my heart, and he provided a model for me that life goes on after sexual assault.
It's just what helped me (people treating it as something that's beyond your control, people being open about their experiences and not treating you like your life is over) is really something I'd like to share, and I'm not sure if there's really any way that I can. 

[Glowcat]

Basically, I just want to ask the majority of the folks on here to take a moment to imagine something. I mean, really, no arguments, no anger, just… close your eyes for a moment and allow yourself to imagine actually being in one of these situations.

Spoiler: If you’re male… (click to show/hide)

Imagine you live in a world where 99% of video game characters are female. It’s always been that way. When you got your first video game system as a kid, all the playable characters were female. Sure, there were male characters in the background, but they didn’t usually speak. You certainly couldn’t *be* one of them. If you wanted to play a video game, you almost always had to play a girl.

Imagine that over the years you start to see a few male characters pop up here and there. Sweet, you think, I’ll get to play as a guy for once! Well, yes, but playing a male character generally means being a barbarian and no other class. Also, your “armor” consists of nothing but an enormous codpiece. I mean, seriously, there must be a boa constrictor in there or something. Your body is always hairless and muscular, and your character is ALWAYS striking the sexiest possible pose. Usually, the only function of this character is eye candy for the ladies. In the story, he probably serves solely as a love interest, or as a caricature of pure violence and animal instinct. Not much room for intelligence or sophistication when it comes to male characters. On the rare occasion that there’s more than one male in the story, they usually just spend the whole time fighting over a girl. Or in the more saucy games, they might get involved in a little guy-on-guy flirtation, a little titillation for the girls to enjoy. They don’t get to do a whole lot of saving the world or any of that stuff. That stuff is for girls.

So mostly, you play girls. Not sexy, scantily-clad girls. Sensibly dressed girls with broad interests and abilities. There are no boobies, there is no cleavage, no makeup. Just women getting shit done.

Imagine a conversation between two girls. “How come I can’t get my boyfriend to play video games with me?” “I dunno. Video games are just… kind of a girl thing I guess. Boys play sports and stuff.”

Eventually, guys start to realize that video games *aren’t* only fun for girls. They’re just… fun. But, understandably, guys aren’t terribly thrilled with *always* having to play a girl. I mean, guys make up almost half the people on the planet. What’s the deal with almost all the characters being female, and the male ones always just being ridiculous, 1-dimensional stereotypes?

And so men start to ask for more gender diversity in games. We want more male characters, they say. We want deeper, more complex characters. We’re tired of playing girls and barbarians and nothing else.

And the girls reply… so what? What’s the difference? It’s just a game. Why does it matter if the characters are male or female? I don’t see anything wrong with games just the way they are.

Spoiler: If you’re heterosexual… (click to show/hide)

Same story as above. The vast majority of characters in games are gay. I mean, pretty much all of them. You want to play a game? Better be up for all the romantic content of the stories to be homosexual. Don’t like watching two guys make out with each other? Well, then don’t play games. That’s just the way it is. Tired of all the heterosexual side characters being macho stereotypes who just want to play football and make babies? Want to play a story with a relationship you might actually be able to relate to? Well, go make your own game then, if it’s so important to you. All the gay gamers don’t see any problem with the situation as it is. What difference does it make if the characters are gay or straight? It’s just a game.

Spoiler: If you’re white… (click to show/hide)

All the characters are black (or Hispanic, or Asian, take your pick and fill in the blanks accordingly). If you want to play a game, your character is going to be black. Otherwise, the gameplay is the same. No real difference here, actually. Well, except that rare white character you see on the sidelines. The racist, slave-owning redneck. Most of the dialogue of white characters consists of phrases like “YEE-HAW!” and “Git er dun!” 99% of the time, white characters are the enemy. They’re the ones you need to kill. They’re evil business leaders sending wave after wave of white mercenaries at you. They’re slave owners you’re revolting against and slaughtering. Very rare to see a white protagonist, and even then, it’s almost always an absurd stereotype.

Do you care? Does it bother you? Sure, over the years a few games start adding in more developed white characters. But it’s a risky move. Games like that don’t always sell. And why should a game company put resources into making something more “diverse” when it’s selling just fine the way it is? This is what the players want, why change the formula?

There are plenty of other types of diversity, but you get the idea.

Building off that...

Unfortunately simply imagining isn't enough, because while people might be able to temporarily imagine hypothetical scenarios where they're in a minority they never get a sense for being trapped in it.
And neither do they get the full sense of marginalization that happens across society. This is why they'd even put for "make your own games" as a solution when the systems which control the production of games tends to overwhelmingly favor the dominant group. Sure, obscure Indie games can shuck off the mold, but the criticism around these issues need to be (imo) directed at AAA games and their production since those games have the largest reach.

An example of why hypotheticals aren't enough by themselves: Men don't tend to understand the difference between sexual objectifying and sexual desire, so when women object to constant sexualized imagery crafted for the male gaze they dismiss such concerns based on not ever experiencing that dehumanizing influence. They see it all under an umbrella of "sexiness" and conflate expressing one's own sexuality or recognizing it with having one's sexuality and body appropriated for heterosexual male titillation. It's not that women can choose to play slutty avatars but rather that they're forced to, and they're forced because the game wishes to play to heterosexual male demographics.

[MDFification]

An example of why hypotheticals aren't enough by themselves: Men don't tend to understand the difference between sexual objectifying and sexual desire, so when women object to constant sexualized imagery crafted for the male gaze they dismiss such concerns based on not ever experiencing that dehumanizing influence. They see it all under an umbrella of "sexiness" and conflate expressing one's own sexuality or recognizing it with having one's sexuality and body appropriated for heterosexual male titillation. It's not that women can choose to play slutty avatars but rather that they're forced to, and they're forced because the game wishes to play to heterosexual male demographics.

Regrettably, this is all true. There is sexual dimorphism in the brain; female sexuality is flat-out more complicated and poorly understood (by science; while male arousal can be reliably predicted, predicting female arousal is a lot less reliable) than male sexuality. Society tends to look at sexuality in general through a male lens, which doesn't make sense; women have a lot more factors at play in their arousal, so what is to males not a big deal is to females trivializing and objectifying.
Sauce, more sauce and yet more sauce.

It can't help that society caters so much more to male sexuality than female sexuality, but men really don't and won't get it. If males were in the place of females for sexual objectification, they really wouldn't mind all that much; to us its probably more understandable since our minds work that way anyway.
Not to trivialize male sexuality; we're not just sex machines. We have feeling, experience romantic love, and value our relationships just as much as women do. There's just... kind of a disconnect for men between love and sex. We still need and are capable of both, but they're not so intertwined.

Neither sex (some individuals, maybe) can really get inside the others head very well in this area. It makes it hard for the both of us to be respectful. Men are trained form birth to think they're lesser if they actually acknowledge their emotions and don't just ignore and repress negative feeling (besides anger), of course, and being disrespected from a position of strength is nowhere near as serious of a deal.