Wolfire Games Forums

Endoperez wrote: Heh, seems like my previous post hit the mark here.

I'd say APsychonaut is talking about concepts using terminology that isn't clear to you, using a tone of voice that makes you think you're being threatened. The barbs aren't directed at you, specifically.

Well, it's not really that. It's just that that particular paragraph was rather rambly and . . . well, poorly written. Most of the time I can understand someone even when using completely unfamiliar terminology.

Endoperez wrote:That actually is a sign of a system of patriarchy. It doesn't mean conscious obstruction, it's a social construct or a social situation where men tend to get into more powerful positions for various reasons.

Well, of course it's a sign. But, then, men are discriminated against pretty much as often as women, just in completely separate areas. Would that then mean that there is both a patriarchy and a matriarchy in place at the same time?

Endoperez wrote:It doesn't mean that stereotypes should be replaced, BUT, when you see a game with a damsel in distress character (because there are so many of those), ask for a female protagonist (because there are so few of those).

It doesn't really work like that.
"The current stereotypes should still exist, but when you see one of them you should whine about it."

AmorphousGamer wrote: Well, of course it's a sign. But, then, men are discriminated against pretty much as often as women, just in completely separate areas. Would that then mean that there is both a patriarchy and a matriarchy in place at the same time?

You weren't aware of the examples of inequality given before, so I don't trust your judgement. You don't know what women's situation is but claim 'pretty much as often' -based on what? We'll need to establish that first.

What are men denied? If it's emotions and roles considered feminine, it could be a symptom of patriarchy. For example, if a stay at home man is looked down on, why is that?

If the answer is related to money, wealth or work or value, what reason is there for a stay at home mom to be more accepted if it isn't inequality?


Re: stereotypes and complaining: true enough, there might be better ways to strive for the goal

I DO apologize for the rambly mess, I should really stop debating at insane hours.

The point I was aiming for there was even though men are portrayed as a stereotype, said stereotype is almost always in a positive light, encompassing what are stereotypically 'masculine' traits. Women, on the other hand, are almost always typecast as the care-y, sympathetic type, or damsels in distress. (And when they're extras it's typically as a sexualized individual, or the aforementioned typecasts.)

But I disagree on having more stereotypes be acceptable, though it might be an okay interim step. Ideally, someone should look at a person and go 'oh, there's a person!', not 'oh, there's a greaser!' or whatever other labels they tend to favour. As far as I can tell, though, Endo's talking about simply starting by molding current stereotypes into less harmful ones.

...and he pretty much fired my next shot for me <3

Oh don't even start with saying women are sexualized.
I'm still looking at you, big buff man.
So basically you're complaining about women being portrayed as feminine, while men are portrayed as masculine? And that somehow masculine is better? I don't quite understand your logic there.

I'm complaining that traits are being pigeonholed for either gender.
And- there's a difference between a sexually attractive individual, and being sexualized.
You will see infinitely more women being summarily dismissed from a character's bedroom than the opposite.

Also; Speaking subjectively, I really don't think a lot of the men on screen are all that attractive.

AmorphousGamer wrote:Oh don't even start with saying women are sexualized.
I'm still looking at you, big buff man.
So basically you're complaining about women being portrayed as feminine, while men are portrayed as masculine? And that somehow masculine is better? I don't quite understand your logic there.

Basically, muscular man is also a powerful man, a strong man.
A beautiful woman is just beautiful.

Even if both stereotypes are equally strong, masculinity is more positive than femininity. The feminist logic is based on the assumption that masculine is generally considered to be linked to the political leadership, moral authority, and control of property (see patriarchy).

And it might be that as far as stereotypes go, beauty of women is more prevalent than muscularity of men.

The stereotypical politician is dressed in a black suit, not a dress. It's a masculine suit, based on old military uniforms, and the stereotypical politician is male.

Moral authority... Religious leaders are male, but let's ignore that because that's a whole another can of worms. Let's look at, hmm, are teachers a moral authority? I guess so. There are several stereotypes of a teacher. The female stereotypes I can think of are "young and sexy" and "old and stern". Is the stereotype of a male teacher "young and buff" and "old and stern", then?

Control of property... bankers. See politician. Or check this. First, are there more men, or more women? Second, are the women beautiful more often than the men are buff and muscular?

Minor Update
Volunteered to do some work on a pone game and apparently one of the other programmers getting involved is a female.

This thread is TL;DR for 1am

Would the "pone" be a pony game or a phone game?

Maybe both?

adwuga wrote:Maybe both?

Or... a phony pony phone game.

phony pony phone?

[+] bonus pic

The, uh, original article is written by a veteran woman programmer and mother. She does say that the biggest people who are pushing for women to be programmers are feminists that dismiss her as a woman because she dresses in jeans and doesn't wear make-up.

Madd the Sane wrote:The, uh, original article is written by a veteran woman programmer and mother. She does say that the biggest people who are pushing for women to be programmers are feminists that dismiss her as a woman because she dresses in jeans and doesn't wear make-up.

They dismiss something about her, yes, but I don't think they try to dismiss her as a woman. Perhaps it's about her assumed need to not stand out from her male peers, or something. Yeah, it's pretty stupid. I don't know what point you're trying to make exactly.

My comment was mostly because it seems that APsychonaut's comment seemed to me to be a knee-jerk reaction to the title of either the article's title or the title of this thread.