Misogyny from IG to OOC

Adalie

The (hopefully well reasoned and respectful) debates were always what I loved about the old forums, so let's see if we can make that happen here. A Facebook conversation is going on right now that I think applies here. I've edited everyone's names out but my own (kind of) though the posters can come forward if they please, of course. It's clear what I think, I guess, but I want to hear your opinion (both about Achaea and other games)!

---

Mr. A:
I realize this will get me flamed, but complaining about misogyny in a game whose focus is being a serial murderer, carjacker, and general bad guy confuses me. Misogyny irl is not cool, but violence irl is a lot less cool. We as an industry are constantly going on the defensive to claim that violence in games doesn't beget violence in the rest of life. If that's so, why is misogyny in games so much more likely to beget misogyny irl than violence is likely to beget violence?

It just smells hypocritical to me, and self-motivated: Game developers have gotten used to accepting horrific in-game violence, accepting that genocide, mass murder, and serial killing are normal activities even for a so-called 'good guy' in games. Plus, those activities sell billions of dollars of games every year, and cutting them out of games would literally destroy the industry overnight.
By all means, we should not tolerate misogyny in games companies and in their employment practices. I personally won't tolerate overt misogyny in the games communities my company runs. Similarly, I won't tolerate threats or actual violence from my employees or the communities my company runs. In games on the other hand? They are, particularly in the case of roleplaying open-world games, a form of pure escapism to me, and therefore I'm not that interested in applying normal social mores to in-game behavior. Double that for single-player games where you are literally not hurting anyone by playing (or so I believe, insofar as I don't buy that violence or misogyny in video games begets it irl, and have never seen any reputable study showing definitively that they do.)

*

Adalie:
Well said! I actually had never really thought about this specifically (the violence part, yes, but not the misogyny) which kind of supports your point even more, since I've no doubt encountered misogyny in some form or fashion many times in my years playing Achaea, but it never occurred to me that what was happening to my character IG actually translated to how the player might treat me IRL (at least on the basis of being a woman alone) in the same way that them PKing me never meant that I thought I might need to fear for my life at the next Achaea meet.

*

Ms. B:
 If it were a case of Misogyny in a game singularly I would agree with you. But it is not singularly in a game, it permeates many games, and more importantly the culture far too many of the communities. Also, whenever the discussion comes up, it seems there are very loud very angry voices unwilling to consider the discussion.Or that many women feel they have to play gender neutral or as men to have a normal and fun experience with other players. That is what makes me take pause. It isn't as simple as saying all games are misogynistic- that is unfair. But until people are willing to have the discussion rationally I think that is the biggest indicator that there is a problem.

*

Adalie: 
Here's the difference: A -player- yelling at you to "get back in the kitchen" on CoD and a -character- telling you women have no role in politics in a role-playing game. One is someone being an asshole, one is someone playing a role (and for the latter, you have the freedom to chop their head off for saying it because this is make-believe (You wouldn't do that in real life, would you? As a result, I won't judge you for doing it IG!)). I actually enjoyed the characters who bent social norms in Achaea because it made it a richer experience. If everyone just bowed and curtsied and loved everyone else, it wouldn't be nearly the rich and malleable experience it was for me. Some of the people playing assholes were assholes IRL, but many of them were enjoying playing a role much as an actor would or the way a novelist enjoys writing her villain. Albeit some of those people are crappy people IRL too, most of them are not at all what their characters are. As long as the misogyny, violence, and other socially unacceptable stuff stays IG, then I think it should be chalked up to the roleplay experience and nothing more.

*

Ms. B:
Right, It sounds like you had a great experience in Achaea in which there was IRL ribbing that didn't interfere with game play- you still had a good experience and mods who would step up if necessary. I am in no way saying you are not having a great game experience as a girl, or that you are unwilling to take the same teasing everyone else gets. I am talking more about the the bigger wide spread issue- which includes other games and spaces where players did not just rib each other else why would http://fatuglyorslutty.com/ be a thing or Anita Sarkeesian have her safety threatened and her online identity ruined just because she wanted to do research about women and video games http://www.feministfrequency.com/.../ I absolutely agree that there are games that are great- and with misogynistic themes- I am just pointing out WHY it is an issue that people want to discuss and why it should not be dismissed.

Adalie

(Post was too long, so here's part two!) 

Mr. C:
I'm not particularly cool with violence in games, either. But really, based on a quick glance it actually sounds a lot like Jos's post on Feministing about Skyler White. http://feministing.com/.../ The misogyny was something that the reviewer noticed. She's not really under any obligation to NOT point out what she noticed; indeed, she's sort of under the exact reverse: she's supposed to point out what she DID notice.

*

Mr.
 I find the violence in games is stylized to the point of being misleading, particularly to undereducated young men bound for the military. I do not like how avatars of real soldiers with families are treated with careless impunity by players. It reminds me of how real soldiers were and continue to be treated as expendable.

*

Ms. E:
I agree with the person who said it's not an issue in one game, it's an issue in many games, making it pervasive and less defensible.

I don't like the argument that it makes sense in context, because the context is a fantasy world that its creators have complete control over.

For example, in Dragon Age, the men and women wear the same armour. The army scenes show both male and female soldiers. A lot of people make the argument that a world based on mediaeval times should have its women subjugated to its men, but they miss the fact that a fantasy world is a fantasy world, so it doesn't have to have a similar cultural history that caused women to be deemed inferior to men. Which Dragon Age showcases.

You can do whatever the fuck want in a fantasy. If someone can steal a car with no repercussion, someone can treat a woman equal to himself. If someone can shoot a fireball out of his hands, a woman can be respected leader.

*

Adalie:
Personally, I can only think of this in terms of Achaea, because Achaea is the only "real" MMORPG I've played. In Achaea, there are tons of women in high-ranking and important positions, so it stands to reason that anyone who behaves in the game as if women are lesser than men are that way by personal choice and not as some greater mechanic of the game itself. Furthermore, there are gods and goddesses of equal badassery (that's a word, shhhh). Everything, by function of Achaea itself, seems pretty darn equal. The people who choose to play out social taboos themselves are acting of their own accord to the varying acceptance of their fellow players and the characters their characters interact with.

This is where I disagree with an extent with Ms. E., because I feel like when the game is so player-influenced, it -can- make sense in context. If game developers set out to create an imbalance, I might be pretty outraged, but in this case at least, the developers seem to have set up an even playing field and the majority of characters have run with it. The ones who don't are, like I said, playing a role in theory and nothing more. 

My big gripe comes when the player themselves behave this way, whether it be through the way they play the games, (like the way they treat the women they may have to run dungeons with in a PuG (I've been on the bad end of that and it isn't fun) the way they interact in forums, or whatever, but I think that comes down to the person themselves and the secure feeling of the supposed anonymity of the internet. That, to me, is neither caused nor exacerbated by video games, though video games might be an outlet for the deplorable behavior.

*

Mr. C:
@Adalie, it gets back to what Kathleen was saying. If as little as, say, 30% of games were misogynistic in their setting (and MUDs and MMORPGs tend to be fairly decent about this, so I'd peg the percentage in reality to be under that), it's actually perfectly fine. The general issue is that misogyny in industries (including the game industry) tends to be more on the order of 90%. So the request isn't so much that the misogyny stops at all but that it stops being a default go-to base assumption.

*

Adalie:
I guess I should just drop all the Achaea-talk and ask: When you watch Mad Men, do you spend the whole time offended at the misogyny or just enjoyed being wowed and how much times have changed? I tend toward the latter. In the same way, I could play GTA V and just enjoy gawking at how exaggerated the womanizing may be there and be thankful that my day-to-day isn't like that. But most importantly, I don't expect the misogyny in my day-to-day to get any worse because that particular game now exists.

*

Mr. F:
I think it's due to the more recent slew of people calling out a few decades of misogyny in gaming, and we're just that much more aware of it now. Sort of like gay bashing a few years ago, maybe. It's the current topic (and it's a great one to push), so I think a lot of people are knee-jerking and forgetting the bigger picture that this is all being done in the context of abhorrent and illegal activity. From the reviews I've read so far, it sounds like GTA5 could use some more three dimensional female characters.

Sarapis

I'm Mr. A, whose post initiated the discussion. I don't mind being open about it, though I appreciate Adalie letting me decide whether to attach myself publicly to it or not.

Tania

I'm Ms E, and I think that people would be more shocked if this game didn't have misogynist undertones than they are by the extreme violence and misogyny, and I think that is a sad reality in the world right now.

Eld

I'm not much of a gamer outside Achaea and I don't know what game was being discussed (though I'm guessing the new GTA?), so salt to taste. One reason that misogyny IG might be more likely to beget misogyny IRL than violence IG is to beget violence IRL is exactly that the violence in the game is so much more extreme. Running around with a shotgun carjacking people is clearly societally unacceptable behavior, while running around calling people "bitch", "cabbie", or whatever, is something that you might see every day and so might get reinforced in a way that the violence doesn't.  

Adalie

You know, @Eld, you brought up a point I didn't really think about. Maybe misogyny in games (or anything) is more unacceptable to people than violence because violence is illegal in the real world but, at least generally, misogyny is not, so it's more likely to permeate. 

But I still maintain that it's possible to accept games (and all media) in a way as representative of its depicted time or culture rather than as condoning whatever they bring about, and I think @Sarapis (spelled it right this time!) brings up a good point that so many of us insist that the violence therein is inconsequential to our OOC behaviour, so why can't other negative aspects of that particular gameworld also be?

Sarapis

Illegal doesn't equate to 'doesn't bleed over.' The games industry, and almost all of my games industry colleagues, vehemently deny that violence in games bleeds over into real life. Like, a hard line: It...does...not...happen.

Making something illegal never stops it from happening. It just makes it illegal. So the difference can't be that one is illegal and the other isn't.

Eld

Adalie said:

You know, @Eld, you brought up a point I didn't really think about. Maybe misogyny in games (or anything) is more unacceptable to people than violence because violence is illegal in the real world but, at least generally, misogyny is not, so it's more likely to permeate. 

But I still maintain that it's possible to accept games (and all media) in a way as representative of its depicted time or culture rather than as condoning whatever they bring about, and I think @Sarapis (spelled it right this time!) brings up a good point that so many of us insist that the violence therein is inconsequential to our OOC behaviour, so why can't other negative aspects of that particular gameworld also be?

I don't think it's the legality as much as the familiarity. It would be similar with your character smoking pot; it's illegal, but it's likely something you're familiar with, and can at least potentially relate to in a way that you can't relate to bashing someone's head in with a tire iron. 

Mishgul

Wouldnt it depend entirely on the individual in question.

I hate swearing. I think people should always try to speak positively and i noticed that its very easy to swear online in general, not just achaea.

Its just emphasis to a lot of people and a way of driving home their feelings. 4 extra letters that probably don't mean much. I take it really personally however and struggle to respect people who do swear a lot.

I also struggle with games like GTA or any game where you can play a bad guy. I have never played anything evil in any single player game because my brain will automatically think "This is wrong, you must help this virtual NPC or he will be sad and hate you".

Achaea has been the only exception to this and its become a huge struggle to play at times because of this. I am very scared of the bleed over for my attitude and my actions because i take things very seriously.

I have a close friend that went into a spiralling depression after playing shenmue and i have had similar things happen to me from certain games, where i get overly attached to each character. A combination of anxiety, empathy and OCD i think causes it for me.

There are definitely others who feel like me and they may not have the capability or morality to differentiate between how they decide what to do in a game and in reality.

This is no fault of the game or its developers. These games tend to have ratings and warnings ands its down to each individual to heed them.

Jovolo

Much like the cancers of the food industry in McDonalds, KFC, and so on. It's entirely on you if you walk up there, order food and then eat it. I feel like it's the same with extreme content in games. No one is putting a gun to your head and forcing you to buy it, and age ratings are there to prevent immature, easily-influenced and undeveloped minds from purchasing the games they shouldn't be playing. It isn't the game developer's fault if parents circumvent that rule and get a game with extreme content for their child.

@The legality topic. I think the main point there is that illegal behaviour is generally very frowned upon, and not likely to be a common occurrence out there in the real world. Therefore, the legal behaviour (Such as swearing) is more likely to be reinforced by role models in the real world and children playing the games are more likely to repeat the behaviour they see as a result. Illegal behaviour such as violence is similarly prone to that concept if a child is surrounded by it - of course, this is again not a fault of the games. It's a fault of the child's environment. 

Never blame the game.

Nakari

I would argue that what separates violence from misogyny is the ability to recognize it and call it out. I think that our society is generally much better at recognizing that acts of violence against others are bad then we are are at recognizing when sexist actions are bad. I don't think that it's the recognition of these acts as legal or not legal so much at is is the recognition of whether they are or are not morally permissible in a broader sense, as I certainly think that more people will recognize that shooting a random person is never okay than will recognize that catcalling a woman on the street is never okay (and I'm not ranking these actions by level, just using them both as examples of things that should not be done).

When this comes down to actions in video games (and media in general, probably), though, this matters because our ability to recognize an action as bad is necessary for us not to take it into real life. In a hypothetical (and quite utopian) world where individuals could recognize the problematic actions of all stripes (violence, racism, sexism, homophobia to name a few in no particular order) taken by individuals in media (or asked of them, in the case of interactive media such as video games), then we could recognize the artistic value of the usage of those problematic actions within the context of a narrative while at the same time excluding those actions from our daily lives. However, we are, of course, not at that point, and as such I would argue that there is a higher burden on narrators (in this case game designers, for our purposes), to abstain from the use of actions unproblemitised in the narrative that, due to their lack of recognition as problematic (and thus increased likelihood of being accepted as socially acceptable and morally okay), are more likely to be reproduced by consumers of said media, as what we create in media does affect those who consume it. Thus violence in games is probably less problematic, on certain levels, then misogyny is.

As far as the notion that misogyny in video games does not produce it irl, I think that is simply false. I'm not claiming that there is a causation between video games and becoming sexist, rather that video games are a facet of media that, as with all media, creates and reifies certain social ideas and norms. In this regard, actions taken in video games that are sexist and are not recognized as such can help to recreate the notion that such actions are all right. There certainly aren't going to be studies that show a causation either, as this isn't about people becoming uniquely more sexist from playing games with sexism in them, but rather about video games participating in a cultural system that often portrays misogynist actions as all right. Basically it's not about shit getting bad, or bad shit getting worse, but about bad shit staying bad. Of course, the degree to which many the actions that were talked about (blatant insults, for instance) are going to be perceived as permissible are certainly mitigated by how obvious the sexism in them is, but it is also true that many of these actions, degrees of actions, or even the words themselves are not commonly recognized as sexist by mainstream culture, thus making them an issue when people see them unchallenged in media.

Of course, any sort of ultimate value measurement here becomes largely inapplicable when we stop talking about the blatant recognition of violent acts, such as shooting someone on the street, and largely, though less so, blatantly sexist acts such, as exaggerated womanizing and insulting of women, and move on to the more subtle incarnations of these problems, which I actually think is the more problematic aspects of it. For instance, while video games and violent media may not cause actual increases in violent acts within society (as all good evidence suggests), the way that violence is presented probably does desensitize us to violence and help reify the social norms that allow for the acceptability of violence as a concept, such as societal views on violence and suffering in other countries. Similarly, I think that the instances of misogyny in games that are more problematic are the ones that do not revolve around blatant actions of characters, but rather around how the portrayal of women in games is shaped, such as the lack of female characters in general and the tendency for them to be used as problematic plot devices. Several of the sources posted in the original posts are talking about this, and I think that these more underlying issues of framing and re-articulations of often unconscious societal norms is likely more problematic in terms of their effects in real life and go from violence to racism to sexism to many other issues.

However, it's probably good to address these problems wherever possible, and I think that sometimes that means trying to restrain from creating misogynist and sexist characters unproblemitized within the narrative, because at the point where so many sexist acts are widely considered acceptable not only is the artistic or role-play value of portraying problematic actions lost, but there is also a very real risk of the portrayed attitudes reinforcing attitudes in the real world.

Aepas

I'm a military man that loves swearing, being socially unacceptable and sometimes a straight up dick.... at work.

I believe many things change depending on your location and vocation, as well as your current state of mind. When I am at work I swear like a sailor, when I'm off work I drink like a sailor, and I'll be as darn crude and dirty as I want because that's the lifestyle I live around. On the other hand, anyone that has met me that I know is a civilian will tell you I'm rather polite and proper. I was raised well, I don't swear in public and I hold the door open for everyone. All that good stuff. People will constantly change based on their surroundings, their attitude, speech, and actions will all be slightly (and sometimes greatly) different. This goes for being in RL and IC too.

I fear that the media of movies make violence a lot closer to home than video games do. Video games are all quite obviously fake. Even the very realistic ones. While people may get attached to a few names in COD or fall in love with Master chief, that will not have the same effect that a person who finds a relation to an actor in a movie. We need to be able to properly relate before we can start letting it invade our personal lives, and seeing a real person on the screen is a surefire way to do that.

I like to believe that people are indeed smarter than just assuming that killing in a video game or movie is that simple though. Anyone that has witnessed a death by malice or mishap, or killed anything be it animal or person would very easily know that death is a long slow process that is exceptionally potent to anyone's psyche. When you play a game you're just reading a story, especially in fantasy games. We've all heard the legends of the great (person) that stood his ground and slew over (random number) orcs in defense for his home. Hearing something like that inspires awe and respect, so imagine playing that or seeing it.

Basically I say let the violence be as violent as they want. Any decent person will know the difference. Also to Mr. D

Mr.
 I find the violence in games is stylized to the point of being misleading, particularly to undereducated young men bound for the military. I do not like how avatars of real soldiers with families are treated with careless impunity by players. It reminds me of how real soldiers were and continue to be treated as expendable.

Then you must hate what real war has looked like even more. I don't mean to rag on anyone specifically, but let's avoid that talk. Anyone in the military knows that they signed up for something that has the highest price. In a sense we "are" expendable and can very easily be sent to our deaths. We know. Nobody gets to make that judgment except for us. I for one am aware of my expendable nature and what I gave my right to live up for. (enough side ranting, I've just never liked that conversation)

edit: undereducated young men bound for the military is a rather broad sweeping statement as well. That's not actually a type of group, there are some that might fall into both categories but it's not like you can point them out or say that video games will have any effect on that specific group.

Ellodin

As far as violence in video games, thoughts on things like the Manhunt series?

Strata

The parents who rally to government and game companies to keep violence out of video games (sometimes because their own kids are dead or in prison due to some violent crime) are ignorant and unwilling to acknowledge that their children are responsible for their own actions. I fear one of these irrational coddlers more than I would a gym full of 13 y/o GTA addicts.

Most of the time, excessive play of violent video games by younger kids isn't "brainwashing them into zombie psychokillers" - but it could contribute to a poor attitude and unhealthy behaviors in their lives - especially if they are not very good at killing others and constantly lose, or have shitty internet and can't stay connected, etc. Having to blow into the game cartridge 50 times just to start Mortal Kombat? I will admit those horrifying experiences as a child played a role in me having serious patience issues as an adult

Parents need to recognize and properly channel their kids into a healthy balance of different activities instead of buying them xbox and ignoring them 90% of the time while they develop crackhead mentality over CoD and then grow up to become IRL @Bonko - and then parents going "WOE IS ME -- IT'S EA's FAULT" when their kid beats their wife or shoots up a school.

Orzaansyn

Well... I really genuinely think that cultural products from entertainment industries are the main cause of violence.

History proves it.

Joan of Arc, was playing Call of Duty during spare times.

Attila, very well known for being fond of GTA IV.

Julius Caesar and Vercingetorix, obviously preparing a LAN of Counterstrike.

And there is many more exemples!

Boosteya

I'm an ungirly girl who hates shopping, and wish I were smarter than I think I am, because intelligence is sexy to me. I know I'm not smart; there are seemingly simple concepts I just don't get. I've heard from an Achaean player who says her character is male because she didn't feel she was taken seriously when she tried to play a female. I've heard from a LOT of folks who prefer to play female characters in Achaea, because females 'get away with' more; this view is underscored by an IRE site article about crossplaying.

I don't crossplay because it's just not me. I've tried, a few times! Never stuck.

I think addressing crossplaying is relevant here, because it separates player-gender from character-gender, and makes it easier to see what is or is not IC misogyny vs. OOC misogyny. @Lynara, where are you?

Jovolo

Ellodin said:

As far as violence in video games, thoughts on things like the Manhunt series?

Entertaining, personally.

I'm of the opinion that if you harm someone due to the influence of a video game, then you already had a few screws loose, and whatever the trigger was is almost irrelevant.

Adalie

The legality remark was just to (maybe poorly) illustrate how perhaps someone might be a little less prone to violence seeping into their lives from video games because there is this big, agreed-upon social rule that violence is bad, whereas misogyny was downright accepted until relatively recently and so it might be harder to unblur that line between what is ok when playing pretend and not ok when you go out into the world tomorrow.

Vansittart

@Adalie, this is super interesting, and it's something I think about a lot.

I posted somewhere else about racism and gaming - particularly in Achaea where "racist" RP is completely legitimate.  I think a lot of it is whether the setting is sufficiently divorced from the real world to allow people to maintain a bit of distance; to avoid hurting people who do experience these things on a daily basis.  In Achaea, I would have no problem yelling "You fin-flapping scaled monster, suck Vastar's balls".  But if the main difference between atavians and tritons (say) was the colour of their skin, that makes me less comfortable - even more so if one was black, and one was white.

Similarly, with misogyny, I don't really have a problem with a medieval world depicting medieval gender relations - I don't think that's sufficiently close to the modern woman's experience to really... hit home.  Sure, it would be great if there was more fantasy with strong female characters but I don't find the typical setting to be obnoxious in the way that @Adalie means.

If it isn't that removed though, if it's a game set "in the real world", I do think game makers (and film makers, and TV makers, and artists in general) have some obligations.  I think those obligations are strongest in gaming which puts you in the role of the protagonist and therefore much more strongly promotes identification with the character.  I think it is deeply uncomfortable for a game to put you in the person of a racist/sexist protagonist if you are not carefully and sensitively exploring those very issues.  I don't buy the argument that games *cause* sexism, or racism and certainly not violence, but I do think they help... I dunno weave some strands in the culture's web.  If people play a game for hours online that require/permit/encourage them to be racist/sexist, I find it hard to believe that doesn't bleed into their real lives.  Much in the same way that I reflexively (still) type CWHO into other messenger windows.

I think it's different with violence, because violence is generally removed from people's real life experiences (placing some distance between things much as "fantasy racism with atavians/tritons" does) .  Most people don't engage in violence in their every day lives but people do *interact* in (forbid the Ladybird Social Sciences) a world which *is* misogynistic, and which *is* racist (I have other things to say about violent games where people have experienced RL violence but this is long enough already).

Which isn't to say those things shouldn't be depicted - just that they should be depicted carefully, and responsibly.

Adalie

Aepas said:

Mr.
 I find the violence in games is stylized to the point of being misleading, particularly to undereducated young men bound for the military. I do not like how avatars of real soldiers with families are treated with careless impunity by players. It reminds me of how real soldiers were and continue to be treated as expendable.

Then you must hate what real war has looked like even more. I don't mean to rag on anyone specifically, but let's avoid that talk. Anyone in the military knows that they signed up for something that has the highest price. In a sense we "are" expendable and can very easily be sent to our deaths. We know. Nobody gets to make that judgment except for us. I for one am aware of my expendable nature and what I gave my right to live up for. (enough side ranting, I've just never liked that conversation)

edit: undereducated young men bound for the military is a rather broad sweeping statement as well. That's not actually a type of group, there are some that might fall into both categories but it's not like you can point them out or say that video games will have any effect on that specific group.

My boyfriend (served as a Marine in Iraq and also an avid video game player) said he couldn't agree with this part of your argument more, @Aepas. 

Phraag

The problem is people having a problem. Misogyny is a word I read a lot here, but misandry I don't even think I read mentioned once. The thing about video games, or really any sort of product is that it falls to the individual to be a bad person and to take bad influence from something influencing them, and everything is an influence it's just that people on an individual level have a way of dealing with things as they do. Remove your notions of misogyny and misandry, or violence, and notions of permeance and replace that with bad people being bad. I don't think violence, misogyny, misandry, racism, or really anything is a problem when it comes to product that a consumer has to actively purchase/pursue/gain. Generalizing that violence in games begets violence is sort of an oxymoron; violent people will become violent at some point. If you don't like a sexist tones then don't watch, play, or read them, and that's how things work in a voluntary society (up until individuals interact with you in these negative ways).

Nakari

Phraag said:

The problem is people having a problem. Misogyny is a word I read a lot here, but misandry I don't even think I read mentioned once. The thing about video games, or really any sort of product is that it falls to the individual to be a bad person and to take bad influence from something influencing them, and everything is an influence it's just that people on an individual level have a way of dealing with things as they do. Remove your notions of misogyny and misandry, or violence, and notions of permeance and replace that with bad people being bad. I don't think violence, misogyny, misandry, racism, or really anything is a problem when it comes to product that a consumer has to actively purchase/pursue/gain. Generalizing that violence in games begets violence is sort of an oxymoron; violent people will become violent at some point. If you don't like a sexist tones then don't watch, play, or read them, and that's how things work in a voluntary society (up until individuals interact with you in these negative ways).

firstly, as far as misandry goes, I'd probably argue that sexism is a better term as it better applies to all forms of discrimination, but I also think that centering the discussion around misogyny is both reasonable and probably necessary, as men are not oppressed to the same extent as women (systems of oppression go both ways, of course, and have deleterious effects on members of both genders, but the system is definitely skewed in favor of men. 

Second, the notion that everything is just bad people being bad seems to only apply for actions that are consciously and commonly recognized as not permissible, while ignoring the extent to which we are all complicit in problematic actions and ideas within society. If it's bad people being bad, then it's also important to recognize both the extent to which we are all bad people and the extent to which people can improve when they are able to realize their actions and the results of them.

Thirdly, claiming that it is an individual problem largely seems to ignore the extent to which individuals are constructed by society. I would certainly hope that we can agree that or ideas about things like gender are largely societally constructed in nature, and to that extent a necessary part of overturning problematic ideas is in attempting to change the attitudes and ideas that we re-articulate and reify within media.

Fourthly, I think the idea that problematic ideas aren't bad when they are in actively accessed media because 'violent people will become violent' seems to imply that individuals are somehow incapable of changing. People aren't born violent or racist or sexist, and people can certainly change. Part of changing though is working to change what society sees is acceptable, which is why talking about problematic notions and their recurrence in culture becomes important.

Lastly, I find that the idea that the 'problem is people having a problem' both untrue and also deeply problematic. Complacency with problematic notions in society is only a recipe for allowing them to stay. I certainly hope that everyone can agree that there are many problems in how society perceives various groups and actions, and changing them is not going to come about through silence.

Tania

I'm just going to say I agree with everything @Nakari has said.

Phraag

Nakari said:

firstly, as far as misandry goes, I'd probably argue that sexism is a better term as it better applies to all forms of discrimination, but I also think that centering the discussion around misogyny is both reasonable and probably necessary, as men are not oppressed to the same extent as women (systems of oppression go both ways, of course, and have deleterious effects on members of both genders, but the system is definitely skewed in favor of men. 

Second, the notion that everything is just bad people being bad seems to only apply for actions that are consciously and commonly recognized as not permissible, while ignoring the extent to which we are all complicit in problematic actions and ideas within society. If it's bad people being bad, then it's also important to recognize both the extent to which we are all bad people and the extent to which people can improve when they are able to realize their actions and the results of them.

Thirdly, claiming that it is an individual problem largely seems to ignore the extent to which individuals are constructed by society. I would certainly hope that we can agree that or ideas about things like gender are largely societally constructed in nature, and to that extent a necessary part of overturning problematic ideas is in attempting to change the attitudes and ideas that we re-articulate and reify within media.

Fourthly, I think the idea that problematic ideas aren't bad when they are in actively accessed media because 'violent people will become violent' seems to imply that individuals are somehow incapable of changing. People aren't born violent or racist or sexist, and people can certainly change. Part of changing though is working to change what society sees is acceptable, which is why talking about problematic notions and their recurrence in culture becomes important.

Lastly, I find that the idea that the 'problem is people having a problem' both untrue and also deeply problematic. Complacency with problematic notions in society is only a recipe for allowing them to stay. I certainly hope that everyone can agree that there are many problems in how society perceives various groups and actions, and changing them is not going to come about through silence.

I don't want to discuss sexism because frankly it is a trite conversation that is highly opinionated regardless of facts. Needless to say people should be more humanitarian and less gender oriented; basing need, desire, want, hate, etc on the individual. Moving onto the other issues you addressed.

The second statement is rather passive, or really does not say anything but to generalize a collective group of faceless people. Do you want to know a secret? We are all as individuals an island to ourselves. We as individuals have ideas and notions that while sometimes agreeable with others can be a massive paradigm switch to someone who just does not think those ways. Just because one day you are in your world of morality does not mean that at any moment someone(s) with a different idea of morality, what is good, or bad will not bump into you. Now whose ideas, or morality, or actions are wrong? Do we go on the general theme of our society as to whom is right is right or wrong, and if so on what bases do you make these claims? What if my society believes in entirely different things than yours? The problem with trying to improve anything based on generalization is that your generalization is just a thought, or theme a mood if you will and someone, somewhere, or an equal, or more amount of people believe your thoughts, morals, ideals are wrong. 

I think I covered a bit of your third statement, but let's go into it a bit more. Individuals are constructed by society is a major implication which strips individualism from the statement and instead makes people seem like a mass. There are people who conform with societal standards I suppose, but what society are we talking about because that's important. People are not the sum of a greater whole by any means and we are influenced by things we see, hear, taste, smell, but what we gather from these stimuli are different as individuals. Certainly there is a large amount of group think mentality, but no not everyone is a mass conforming into the "society" blob you speak of. 

Continuing with my  statements from above you speak of nature, and constructed society influencing gender roles, or am I not understanding that because honestly a bit of what is being said seems a mish mash of words to garner praise (like saying Rock, Flag, and Eagle to an overly eager patriotic group of people in no other context than that they seem to represent patriotism) instead of clear meaning. I agree that gender roles are largely formed based on genetics (if that's what you call nature), and that society seems to use these roles against people. People say a lot of mean things because some people just have different understandings than you, or morals. Again however I think changing media to better censor or hand hold sensitive people is a bad idea while perhaps it would be good to not advocate overtly anti-human, racist, sexist, even violent media we must allow people to express individuality even if we disagree with it until it conflicts with the laws of our society (not the feelings of the people in that society).

The fourth statement is a bit frivolous. There are chemical deficiencies in people which cause them to lean towards certain behaviours. I don't disagree that people can change however this change must be seeked and in some not all cases as is with anything things will change. We are limited by the balances in our brains as much as we are the will of others which is to say that these things can be ever shifting, changing, and beyond our control to an extent.

Finally we come to my notion that the problem is people having a problem which is true because otherwise if someone didn't have a problem with what I said (that person being you) then I wouldn't have to respond so the problem is someone had a problem with something I said. To be very clear the only reason anyone has an issue with gender, race, or anything else is because someone cares enough to make an issue out of it. There is a problem with racism in America still and most of us are not complacent as there are organizations working towards equality within all races. There is a problem with sexism (supposedly) in America and there are several groups fighting against, for, and with all the ideals. There is no complacency it's that you will only see things working if they work for you. There is no silence there are hundreds, or thousands of voices speaking daily about the outrages they have. 

People are social to extent given that there are some who are not and that's okay. In the end I think that individuals should be kept as individuals and a persons merit is based on how you see them. If someone is a racist then make your judgements, if someone is a pacifist then make your judgements, but never try to box up a group of morals, thoughts and ideals and force them onto people. Creativity is based on inspiration, and everything else which is a product of individualism. Don't stifle creativity. 

Saeva

Just a little something this kind of made me think about...
Playing Halo or COD... I've never once gotten violent urges.. until I put that headset on. As soon as I hear the other players smack talking or being rude or completely inappropriate... THAT is when I feel violent urges. Never once from the gameplay itself. Never have I gotten a clean headshot and thought "I need this skill IRL!"
It's a game and it's quite simple (This might not be the case for everyone, just personally) to keep it defined as a game even in my subconscious.
It's the people I'm playing with whose attitudes affect me. Not what their toon is doing to me.

As far as it being a problem in MUD games... I've had well over a decade of playing with some amazing roleplayers and some terrible roleplayers. There are times when a character is just SO easy to hate because they take on the role of the guy or girl that runs across the lines of the social norm. And an excellent role player makes you FEEL that frustration or discomfort in their gameplay.
But generally, I feel like most people can sense someone who is a creepy role player versus a straight up creepy person. Or rude. Or wild. Or crazy. Or evil.
There's a sense of maturity in the way they might spew misogyny; a reason and generally an explanation (even if it's not simple to pull out said explanation from the character), rather than doing anything they can to evoke an "omg did he just say that" moment.

So while I think whether it be violence, racism or misogyny in a game of any kind... it's generally simple to write it off as fantasy and game... until you perceive the opposing players intent. Then it feels real and it feels terrible.

Kresslack

I don't know the source, but I remember hearing/reading once: "If video games cause violence, what games where they playing 100 years ago?"

I don't see time spent in a video game, regardless of the type, as something that contributes to who the person behind the character is. You can do some really messed up and easily unlikeable stuff in a game, especially like Achaea where there are no set roles or conditions, and not be a 'bad' person.

Generally, it doesn't work the other way around though for most people. A lot of people when they play a game like Achaea though play themselves without realizing it. That doesn't really make a lot of sense I guess when re-reading it, but don't really know how to explain it.

As far as misogyny in Achaea, I've not really seen any myself. Are there brothels and harlots in Achaea? Yes, but then again, why wouldn't there be? Some people have a hard time playing GTA because of the violence and how some women are portrayed. It's not the women themselves that are portrayed as I see it, it's the prominent roles that have been around for centuries.

You play a game like Duke Nukem and see strip clubs, 'excotic dancers', lot of swearing. Some people don't like to see that because they think it 'makes women look bad'. Ok, well that's their perspective, and while it may be shared by some, there are certainly other outlooks on it. Some women who are 'entertainers' are not at all ashamed about it and see nothing wrong with it.

I think it's a matter of people not wanting to be reminded about the reality of the world we live in, where professions like courtesans have existed and thrived for centuries. And that's the thing about video games that I find, is that they tend to contain a lot of reality from the world we know and love to hate.

Flair

The violence is IC. When it seems to be going OOC, if there are real threats, etc, then people rightly issue.  With misogyny the lines are not as clear. It's harder to tell. I think a clearly misogynistic characters is one thing. If it seems like it's a real, personal attack based solely on gender, it's another. Is there real misogyny in Achaea? Yep. I tried a female alt and it's a different ballgame. Right out of the gate you're getting naughty tells, guys following you around everywhere trying to do stuff for you, etc. Then again, Flair will often say things like, "Buy me a drink, woman."  Something I'd never say to a woman in real life. I hope it's clear that sort of thing is just in character and not real misogyny.

Saeva

Flair said:

The violence is IC. When it seems to be going OOC, if there are real threats, etc, then people rightly issue.  With misogyny the lines are not as clear. It's harder to tell. I think a clearly misogynistic characters is one thing. If it seems like it's a real, personal attack based solely on gender, it's another. Is there real misogyny in Achaea? Yep. I tried a female alt and it's a different ballgame. Right out of the gate you're getting naughty tells, guys following you around everywhere trying to do stuff for you, etc. Then again, Flair will often say things like, "Buy me a drink, woman."  Something I'd never say to a woman in real life. I hope it's clear that sort of thing is just in character and not real misogyny.

hah sometimes having a guy say "Buy me a drink, woman" is more entertaining than a guy saying "Let me buy you a drink, woman". That's one of those things like I mentioned before that's just entertaining, IC roleplay.
I don't personally think anyone should feel bad for that. If you can't have a laugh or two about it, then it's a little sad. But it's when the person bleeds through the character and is directly attacking player to player, not anything to do with character to character that I think it's a problem.
I'm an advocate of informing administration when someone crosses lines like that because if you don't, then the next victim might not, then it continues.
It's all mostly in our hands if we want to handle it with our big kid pants or sweep it under the rug and let it eat at us.
Same as with any game.

Adalie

You know, @Flair, I haven't played a newb in so long I had actually forgotten about all the inappropriate stuff "young" female characters have to deal with.

I remember when I was really starting the game for the first time and those people confused me and freaked me out a little bit. That is a big problem the game has and, as far as I know, nearly exclusively aimed at female characters. I also don't think it's part of the propositioner's RP. Misogyny aimed at a character that's been around a while will likely be taken with a grain of salt and chalked up to RP, but it definitely puts a bad taste in the mouth of legitimately new players, especially that crap. At least it did for me. 

Jhaeli

I think there are a lot of great points being tossed around. So kudos to @Adalie for bringing the discussion here and Sarapis for starting it.

A couple points I wanted to toss out:

 - Part of the problem is that there are players making female characters and actively pursuing propositions, so to speak. (I couldn't tell you the latest names being banded around, but there were always people around the Archway perpetuating the stereotypes around new female characters.) This can influence other players, who then assume that all new females desire to be treated the same way, and so forth, leading to experiences like Adalie's above.

 - There ARE game developers who just don't get it, where the misogyny is less than obvious. A fantasy RPG that I picked up recently really dropped the ball when the game featured a customisable MALE protagonist ("Okay, not a big deal. I've played male PCs."), his half-naked sister screaming for help ("Eh, alright, DIDs are a tradition."), and a very visibly busty, green-skinned orc that they insisted was ugly as sin ("Uh, what? What does that make me?"). When they had the Orc Girl "trip" and fall on top of the male protagonist minutes after they met with her girlies half hanging out in his face, thirty minutes into the game, I just gave up and tossed it. You shouldn't get crap like this in 2013 anymore, but it's still out there.

Adalie

Of course when I happen to come across this Cracked.com article this morning, I thought of this thread. http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-sexist-video-game-problems-even-bigger-than-breasts/

What do you guys think?