Giant Bomb News

2517 Comments

Eight Women, Eight Responses, and One Dead Island Riptide Statue

A collection of reactions to last week's questionable marketing tactic from a variety of women in the video game industry.

Deep Silver likely did not anticipate the intense reaction to its UK-specific Zombie Bait bundle for Dead Island Riptide when it was announced last week. The news came alongside other bundles for the sequel, but the Zombie Bait bundle received attention for a statue of a torn apart woman that featured nothing more than her bikini-wearing torso.

Deep Silver’s issued a questionable apology in response to the furor. The company did not discuss how this bundle even came into existence, and still hasn’t said whether it will be sold or not. One would hope not? I’ve asked the company for further clarification on that point, but as of publication, nothing has come back.

Here's the company's previous statement in full:

“We deeply apologize for any offense caused by the Dead Island Riptide “Zombie Bait Edition”, the collector’s edition announced for Europe and Australia. Like many gaming companies, Deep Silver has many offices in different countries, which is why sometimes different versions of Collector’s Editions come into being for North America, Europe, Australia, and Asia.

For the limited run of the Zombie Bait Edition for Europe and Australia, a decision was made to include a gruesome statue of a zombie torso, which was cut up like many of our fans had done to the undead enemies in the original Dead Island.

We sincerely regret this choice. We are collecting feedback continuously from the Dead Island community, as well as the international gaming community at large, for ongoing internal meetings with Deep Silver's entire international team today. For now, we want to reiterate to the community, fans and industry how deeply sorry we are, and that we are committed to making sure this will never happen again.”

The story featured my own opinion on the subject, as do most pieces of content on Giant Bomb. You might have suspected part of my response, based on previous articles I’ve filed at the site, and the reaction was along the lines of the last conversation about #1reasonwhy. When I was mulling a follow-up, I didn’t want to have the same back-and-forth, and hoped to introduce some new voices.

So, I reached out to a number of women members of the video game community, and asked them to provide their individual reactions. There are voices from everywhere in games, from development to fellow writers. I didn't specifically seek out people who had expressed an opinion about Dead Island, I just figured they had one. Some chose to speak directly to what happened, some didn't. There weren't any rules.

I’m also going to start something new here. I won't guarantee it’ll happen every time, but for big features, I want to make sure there’s a dedicated time slot for spending time responding to comments. It won’t happen until the story has been up for a little while, and people have had a chance to digest it. In this case, it’s going to be for 30 minutes at 11:30 a.m. PST. As always, anything I don’t get to can be addressed in PM, on Twitter, or through my Tumblr site.

_______________________________________________________________

Rhianna Pratchett, writer (Tomb Raider, Mirror’s Edge)

I’m both a horror fan, and a Dead Island fan. But my initial reaction to Riptide’s mutilated torso was one of shock, bewilderment and confusion. I wasn’t morally outraged. It was more a deep sigh and eye roll of “Oh come on… really? REALLY?” Yes, horror and sex have been intertwined forever, but there was something about the visual depiction of this one that was unexpectedly disgusting for a number of reasons. A mutilated corpse (of either sex) is pretty disturbing, sure. A sexed-up (and there no other way to describe the perfectly round, barely covered up and non-zombified knockers) female corpse, offered up as a reward, has particularly nasty connotations. Especially when combined with the fact that it’s described as 'bait'--a confusing title for what was apparently meant to be (according to the developers) a zombie’s torso, rather than the mutilated and cut up human torso that it actually looked like. Zombies are not normally known for the penchant to chew down on the flesh of other zombies.

I’m accustomed to game companies marketing towards men. But rarely is it quite so blatantly i.e. "Here are some tits!" It’s a mistake to ignore the legions of female gamers out there, who enjoy their zombie killing just as much as the guys. It’s an even bigger mistake to outright annoy them. Believe me, I know this. I’ve got first-hand experience of being caught-up with a video games "controversy" on Tomb Raider, and so I know that marketing and the way we speak about and depict our characters and games is important. Industry and player debate about how we go about this is also valuable.

I was glad to see Deep Silver apologising for this rather large misstep, although I was a little perplexed by the fact that they seemed to use the fact that players apparently do this in the game (or at least have the option to) as some kind of get-out-of-jail card. I’ve done some horrendous things in games. I don’t particularly want to see them immortalised in statue form.

There’s been a lot of talk about whether it would have been okay if it was a male statue. But the fact that it isn’t (and we can only really talk about what we’ve been presented with, not what we haven’t) combined with the way the torso’s been depicted, strongly suggests that the marketeers would never have done that. A sexed-up male torso (and even with a six-pack it’s not quite the same) wouldn’t have appealed to the intended audience (straight men) in the same way. If they’d wanted to keep up this mutilated torso theme then a male torso and female torso, leaning against each other in zombie-baiting harmony, would’ve been a better way to go about it. And, given that the first game had a 50/50 male to female ratio of player characters and a similar ratio in the AI, rather more in keeping with the general tone of the game.

Better still, something like AMC’s Walking Dead collector’s edition head would have been more appropriate and arguably less offensive.

Follow more of Rhianna's work at www.rhiannapratchett.com and on Twitter.

_______________________________________________________________

Clarice Meadows, writer and former sales operation manager at Take-Two Interactive

When marketing departments come up with various tchotchkes to get people to buy a video game, there are a lot of factors that come into it. Theme, desirability, originality, and more. It's a matter of making something unusual and interesting enough, and yet appropriately themed for the game, that fans will absolutely HAVE to buy it. I like to think that there are focus groups involved in the choice of object, or at the very least more than just a bunch of marketing types being locked in a room for days fueled by caffeine and junk food until they come up with an idea and are let out. Sadly, I am pretty sure the latter is usually the case. The zombie torso created specifically for Dead Island Riptide was, in my opinion, a marketing catastrophe. I've heard many responses to this particular item. From "well women don't play games anyway" to "by getting mad about it and yelling, you guys are giving this company free advertising" to "it's like a classical sculpture of antiquity, but a zombie!" So let's break this down a bit.

1) I am a woman, and I play video games. I am not particularly unusual in my gender group in choosing to play video games. I grew up in the 80s, video games were around, and I liked them. I also happen to know quite a few other women who play games, including games like Dead Island. By ignoring women as a market demographic for a video game, companies are losing out hugely. By assuming women will only buy pink, glittery items or games that are about clothing and boyfriends, these companies are losing money. By putting out a completely sexist and crass marketing ploy, they are losing money. Seriously, isn't the point of triple-A games to make scads of cash? I really don't get making choices that lead to losing it instead, can you tell?

2) By yelling about something offensive, we're making a case that offensive marketing is unacceptable. By not yelling, we're giving silent consent to continuing crappy and cheap marketing choices. And trust me, this is crappy, cheap AND lazy marketing. Oh look, a pair of boobs! How innovative! Apparently these marketers think the only people playing video games are under-sexed pubescent mole men. I mean… seriously? Lazy.

3) The last time I checked, classical sculptures did not have boob jobs. Also, the last time I checked, real boobs did not do that while in a string bikini. There's this thing called gravity… And if we're going to have an argument that this torso is not overly sexed up and has turned a live woman (or live lady zombie) into a bunch of sex organs, then… well… someone is lying to themselves. Is it appropriate? Is necrophilia really acceptable now? Because that's what this feels like it's promoting to me.

Lazy and cheap marketing ploys don't make money, they cost money in PR nightmares and hours of dancing around apologizing. It doesn't take much to be smarter, and who knows? Maybe a new market full of lots of money will open up and be willing to spend that money on video games! I mean, didn't you hear that women have jobs and make money and LOVE to spend it? Think big video game companies. Think about all that cash you're letting slide right through your fingers, and play it smarter.

Follow more of Clarice's work at Plays Like a Girl and on Twitter.

_______________________________________________________________

Kate Lorimer, composer and writer

For my part, yes, I found it offensive, it was “the straw that broke the camel’s back” (though I am sure it won't be the last such incident) after a year of dodgy marketing (Hitman, Booth Babes, Tomb Raider, Girlfriend Mode, Anita Sarkeesian). And from a personal viewpoint, even a close friend expressing his being fed up with online “outrage” and “Feminist point-scoring pandering” from game websites like Rock Paper Shotgun--his words--and his complete (and somewhat deliberate) misunderstanding of the concept of Feminism (being supposedly more about pursuing Women’s interests above male's, as opposed to actually being about equality for both genders).

Unfortunately, amongst teens and younger players in general (but as Jenny Haniver has shown, far from exclusively) there’s likely to be a kneejerk reaction backlash at the outrage and offence caused by it, as kids love a bit of blood'n'gore, and certainly amongst the heterosexual hormone fueled boys that whole “cor... boobies” thing has an attraction. See: http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/153593/yes-ah-tah

The reasons for it being offensive are obvious to the clear of thought--it's objectification at its worst. Remove the person from the body, inexplicably leaving a pubescent boy’s idea of the perfect female figure, with balloon boobs (mysteriously untouched by hungry zombie snacking) and a peek at a panty enclosed crotch--of course, hiding the vagina within--which would likely be too offensive/edgy to the same boys!

Would the situation have been mitigated had there been an alternative option of a male torso? It might have slightly balanced the equality issue, though of course there is a special obsession with boobies--especially globe-tastic ones on an itty bitty waist! But the fact that it's just a female torso they decided to go with speaks volumes about their marketing, and the usual narrow-minded targeted demographic. It might have been just as grisly but slightly more in line with the zombie ethos to have had a scary looking zombie head?

Follow more of Kate's work at K8-bit and on Twitter.

_______________________________________________________________

Elizabeth DeLoria, staff writer at Gameranx and cosplay photographer

In September last year, Jill Meagher, a 29-year-old ABC employee, went missing while walking the short walk home from a popular Melbourne street. Thanks to a somewhat viral social media campaign, the entire country began to follow the case, people everywhere wanting Jill to be found alive and well and brought home.

When she was found murdered, buried in a shallow roadside grave after being kidnapped and sexually assaulted by a complete stranger, the entire country went from hopefully to angry. Angry that someone would do this, angry that she wasn't alive and well as we'd hoped, angry that she was minding her own business in her own suburb when she was attacked. People were so angry that when the alleged killer's name leaked, social media erupted with people from every walk of life wanting his head. An entire nation was in mourning, and thousands in Melbourne marched in her honor.

I mention this because we know it's not okay to kill people. We're angered and heartbroken when women are violently murdered (and that's just the cases we hear about.) The news of Jill Meagher, as an example, was devastating to thousands that didn't even know her. Yet at the same time, we're sent these messages that sexualize, glamorize and exploit a woman's decapitated torso. That use violent murder for the purpose of sex appeal and thus profit.

When I see the same people who I saw march for Jill, whose heart sank when they heard the news of her death ask me why this torso statue is "such a big deal," I don't even know how to begin to explain to them how they've come so close to the right thing, yet they sit so far from it.

I'm not really offended, I'm just mortified at how easily we seem to forget.

Follow more of Elizabeth's work at Gameranx and on Twitter.

_______________________________________________________________

Vanessa Hunter, artist and game design graduate

We need to start at the beginning if we are to stop the pervasiveness of sexism in gaming culture, and by sticking this statue in a set that will be received by kids and young adults, Deep Silver is reinforcing an already warped attitude toward women held by the gaming community.

If this statue had been reminiscent of Venus de Milo or the statue of David, and posed in a beautiful, creative way, perhaps I could have even admired it. But as a hunk of flesh plopped into a lifeless pose and trussed up in a string bikini, I seriously have to question the thought behind it.

My main reaction to this statue, however, is that it presents a woman as a literal piece of dead meat. It beheads all personality and life and strips away individuality to present the viewer with what is simply a hunk of flesh in a gaudy bikini. This figure gets up and screams "all I am worth is to fulfill your pleasures"

To a woman like me, it's sickening because it represents how some men see real-life women every day.

From someone who has seen firsthand how a monster who holds this attitude can choke the life out of someone beautiful and radiant, this bust is a nightmare come true. And what's worse is that the attitudes behind such an object reinforce this behaviour as okay.

As for Deep Silver's "apology" placing the blame on its fan base, many of whom view them as a role model, teaching them that sexism is okay if someone else has done it before is unacceptable. They need to grow up.

Follow more of Vanesssa's work through Instagram and on Twitter.

_______________________________________________________________

Anonymous

I didn't feel offended by the Dead Island bikini statue. I did, however, find it quite tiresome. I don't think that it can be denied that the statue is an obvious example of sexual objectification--a mutilated torso with perfectly untouched breasts.

Sexual objectification of women is everywhere, and it's impact is a massive discussion that goes way beyond video games. What I found most tiresome about the statue wasn't the objectification but that making a statue such as this suggests a number of things that Deep Silver assumes about their audience. They assume that the audience are young shallow men whose main interests are tits and violence. It's insulting to men and its a common assumption in video game marketing. Women are not even considered as part of the possible audience. It's outdated thinking.

I've been playing video games since I was a kid, and it's probably the main thing I do for entertainment. I have as many female friends as male who play video games. It is tiresome to be constantly excluded--and if I am included then I am considered a novelty. Women who play games are a sizable chunk of the audience and have been around for as long as video games. Objects like this statue show that we are not really considered to exist.

This individual chose not to share their personal information for fear of potential backlash.

_______________________________________________________________

Melissa Cooke, writer for FemmeGamer

Personally, I think that it's rather disgusting that Deep Silver decided to sell this. The usage of a female chest and abdomen I assume was originally used as a shock tactic to grab the eyes of the media, obviously this has worked, but what made it sexist in my eyes was the way it was dressed up and the proportions on the body.

The breasts are very unrealistic in the way they're being held up by a string bikini, not to mention that there are no wounds on the breasts, making them all the more obvious.The stomach is also very flat, and the bust looks almost anorexic, which is a very damaging image to promote.

The bust lacks also a face or any other feature that makes this bust look human, which could be interpreted as Deep Silver saying "Look this isn't a human, it's a woman, look how her breasts are positioned for your enjoyment, isn't that cool?"

Overall, this is a rather shameless grab for attention on Deep Silver's part, and all this sort of stunt does is give the non-gaming public the idea that games and the people who are playing them are immature, and push any progress the industry has made back a few more years.

Follow Melissa's work at Femme Gamer and on Twitter.

_______________________________________________________________

Anna Kipnis, senior gameplay programmer at Double Fine Productions

It's really hard to approach this topic in any kind of novel way. At this point, it's hard to bring round people who have made their minds up that feminism threatens to ruin their entertainment; to convince them that it's troubling to have games openly revel in dismembering decomposing women in bikinis. Yet I don't believe in censorship, either. Personally, I push this sort of thing into the same category in my brain as boob mugs (which I respect more for at least cutting to the chase and showing actual nudity). I'm not sure why someone would want a headless, bloody, dismembered corpse of a woman's upper torso, with grotesquely fake boobs obscured by a sadly implicated union jack proudly displayed on their mantle, but they're not a person I can imagine seeing eye-to-eye with on many things.

I honestly believe you can have sexiness and violence in games, even at the same time, if that's what you want. I can't think of a great example of a game that has done this particularly well (no doubt there is one), but there are many examples in film. For instance, Quentin Tarantino has made plenty of movies over the years that feature sexy women in violent situations. Even women getting dismembered (Kill Bill Volume 1, Death Proof), and yet it's never felt sexist or misogynist to me. I walk away from the theater generally thinking of those women as role models, not victims.

I think it's on us, game developers, to prevent controversies like this one. I'm a game programmer and I would be pretty bummed if I was working on what was essentially a game equivalent of a boob mug. You're appealing to the lowest, most vulgar aspects of your audience at a time when games are widely criticized for being juvenile, senseless, and immature, only to then complain that the medium is not being taken seriously as an art form. We should strive to treat our medium with the respect it deserves.

Follow Anna's work at Double Fine Productions and on Twitter.

Patrick Klepek on Google+
2527 Comments
Posted by whatisdelicious

@Milkman said:

@InsidiousTuna

Klepek's closing statement from a previous article on games industry sexism is exceptionally relevant.

"I’m a guy, I’ve never had to deal with any of these problems. But I’m willing to admit where there’s smoke, there’s probably fire, and listening is helpful, informative. If you don’t want to listen, you don’t have to. No one is forcing you. Just stop shouting down others who want to."

New strategy for these comments. Instead of going back and forth with people who make the same arguments over and over again, (by the way, I'm seeing a lot of familiar names from the other articles trying to shout down the sexism discussion again...very interesting, maybe that should tell us something) I'm going to point out all the posts that I agree with and make great points. Like this one!

There's a difference between trying to "shout down the sexism discussion" and "disagreeing." People have been acting like it's only possible to be in one of two camps: the enlightened people who think this is horrible and sexist and misogynistic and want the game industry and society to grow, and sexists.

I don't think this statue is sexist, but that doesn't make me a sexist. I think this statue is dumb and I think there are way better examples of sexism in the industry to focus on. I think that focusing on this one in this way, especially after the people who made it have apologized, cheapens any real discussion you can have about sexism in the industry. I think it's silly to keep harping on this just because Deep Silver didn't put "how this statue came to be" in the apology. If you believe it's a sexist statue, then you already know "how it came to be."

I think this statue is pretty representative of the game it came from, and I don't remember people being up in arms when it was released just because there were zombies in bikinis. I think it's absolutely fucking insane that people have more of a problem with this statue than with the screenshot that's in the story right now. That's the game, people. This statue makes sense for that game. Why didn't you complain about the subject matter of the game two years ago when it was released? Why only now, when there's a physical representation of something that's been in the game for two years?

And why would this not be offensive if it was a statue of a male torso? If you're saying it wouldn't be a sexual issue if it's a male torso, then you're saying that a) guys are so animalistic and primal in their sexuality and have no self-control that they'll even get turned on by a stupid bloody chest, and b) women are refined and sophisticated and not sexual so they wouldn't find a statue of a man's chest arousing in the slightest. That's sexist. If you're saying that it's because there's a history of violence against women that doesn't exist for men (there are plenty of problems with that statement but save that for another discussion) and this statue perpetuates that, then you need to take a look at the source material for this statue and realize that that's a totally irrelevant argument when you're talking about a game where you're killing male and female zombies in equal measure and gender doesn't matter.

Posted by Hef

@crcruz3 said:

@jaks said:

HAY GUYS LETS FIND OUT WHAT FEMINISTS THINK OF A STATUE OF A PAIR OF BLOODY BOOBS

Seriously, just stop. Patrick, you're in touch with your feminine side. We get it. I know you're going to shake your head and lament about the state of the comments section on the internet while you pat yourself on the back for being Mr. Smartypants, but this is article really lame. Sex is used to sell basically every product in the world other than Polident. Get used to it because it isn't going to stop. That lame Dead Island statue thing was stupid because it was a stupid thing, not because it was a symbol of male chauvinism in a male dominated industry.

You are going to continue to see shit like this because hot people are still the single most effective way of selling products. You're going to continue to see sexy college ladies in bikinis and cowboy hats on beer commercials and you are going to continue to see hot ex NFL players wearing just a towel hawking Old Spice because it has been determined that a lot of women buy their husband's/boyfriend's toiletries.

So just stop.

Please don't try to use common sense here. We are just enjoying ourselves in this very repetitive multi-article discussion about a female torso zombie statue.

100% what Jaks said.

Posted by cannedstingray

@alibson said:

@asantosbr said:

Good video to counter balance Patrick and these 8 girls opinion:

http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/9noiop/annoyed-gamer-zombie-bikini-bash

Nice to see there's still some rationality left in this world.

I agree, while I don't always agree with what Marcus has to say, this is a rather good point he is making.

To tell you the truth, some of the responses in the article seemed to read like "why am I being asked to comment on this," like the one girl who said she kind of rolled her eyes when she first saw it..

This was a lame marketing item, no doubt, can we just leave it at that and move on.. Patrick is a decent writer, but I think he needs to live in the world for a while longer, and really figure out which things are gonna be worth writing about, and which ones need to just be left to die.

Posted by mikey87144

Good Read. I get their points but I also think a lot of dudes also had eye roll reactions to the whole thing. No one I associate with would want to put a female torso in their house which just screams "Hey, I have no interest in dating a member of the opposite sex." We'll continue to see this stuff in the future just as we continue to see it in the other medians. 3D ass in Transformers anyone...

Posted by mrfluke

@Milkman said:

@EnduranceFun

@rangers517 said:

@Kill: @Kill said:

When Patrick first joined Giant Bomb, he repeatedly said in his articles that he would not talk about his personal political beliefs as he did not feel they were necessary in his writing. As time went on, he started to plug his favourite political podcasts, put his liberal slant on news stories which did not require it, dropped his political opinions on the Bombcast when they wasn't asked for, and now he is actively seeking out some kind of validation for his own moral slant in the form of this article.

Look, I love Giant Bomb and I think Patrick is a great writer. However, this is nothing more than a "ha, told you so" to the community and an ego stroking by a man who believes only his political views should be noted on this site. He could at least have sought out a more balanced view of the situation. After the first three women said largely the same thing and no other viewpoint was represented, I could not help but picture that characteristic Patrick smirk behind all this.

I know this is a ramble, but I feel the other Giant Bomb guys do a great job of concealing their political ideologies. I have no idea who Brad, Jeff, Ryan or Vinny vote for. I could certainly guess, but it definitely isn't as clear as the liberal, Democrat voting, Reddit-reading klaxon of Klepek and his incessant need to spin gaming news a particular way. I find it distasteful, even if I agree with him on issues like this. It's a bit gross on a site which was founded on being impartial and fun.

Just my tl;dr opinion.

Agreed 100%. The other guys tried to keep it a light and fun video game site. No idea why Klepek thinks his views and opinions are so important that he needs to constantly share them with us.

Patrick definitely needs to back away from his articles, but this is a good start.

No, he doesn't. I like hearing his opinion. Also Ryan and Brad voted for Obama. Sorry to ruin the illusion.

Giantbomb was founded on it being just a FUN laid-back website (theres video and news stories out there with Jeff saying something of this sorts), hence why having patrick do something like this and having his opinion out there is very not like the giantbomb we know for us day 0 folk which equals to hundreds of rage comments.

im going to go out on a limb and say a majority of us are here just for the FUN aspect of giantbomb really.

should he back away from writing opinion pieces? no, but his style of writing can be improved to sound more neutral while giving an opinion though.

Posted by Gremmel

Can't be that bad because you keep posting the damn picture of it.......

All this liberal "let's just all get along" bullshit needs to stop soon. You're not solving anything vilifying massive swaths of people, be it men, gamers, women or gun owners.

The statue wasn't hurting anyone, at least not anymore than Django Unchained hurt people and everyone seem fairly fine with that movie. I'm confounded that movies get away with just about anything while the gaming industry is to blame for everything. Are all you liberals really so naive that you think only 13 year old kids who play video games yell "Niggerwhore!" at the top of their lungs when they get excited? I promise you that ain't the case. They learn those words from the man or woman sitting next to you at the office by the way, you know, their parents.

For all you guys who think women need your help. Shush! For all you women who think all men don't respect you. Shush!

Here's the real problem really. Should women have equal pay for equal work done. Obviously. Should that be mandated by law? No but for now it has to be because too many people, including women, don't care! Can this be fixed by being outraged over a GOD DAMN! statue of a grim sex object. Fucking of course not and if you think it does you're still a naive child.

You're not going to change western culture by going "You're the DEVIL!" at everything you don't like. It's not going to work anymore. Even the racists and misogynists are to smart and post-modern to fall for mock shaming anymore. The last thing that worked for was smoking, barely worked for. A twitter uproar lasts for maybe a few days before the cattle move on to the next thing. When was the last time you thought of Kony or Amanda Todd? What did any of that actually do? It made millions of white rich people feel good for a few days but nothing was actually changed in politics by either.

In the end you change peoples opinions about things by having discussions with them. Even raising a child you eventually have to talk to them. My grandparents were racists 10 years ago. They're not anymore. My grandad was a mean drunk 20 years ago, he's not anymore. That wasn't accomplished by the rest of us ignoring their racists remarks or not saying anything. It was just time, and talking.

You're not going to change everyone's mind at once. Again to think that you can is just naive in the sort of connected place we now live in. If you were offended by a torso of a bloody woman without legs, head or arms. Fine. But I really don't care because I don't know you, so SHUSH!

Posted by Sweep

@MMann said:

@Sweep said:

I don't understand why the opinions of women were actively sought out in this instance. Are their opinions somehow more valid? Are women entitled to be more insulted? Why is it a big deal that women are weighing in on this?

Because last time this issue was brought up a whole shit-tonne of people made comments saying that P.Klep should do some "real reporting" and go get feedback from actual women instead of just giving his opinion and treating the site like a livejournal.

So he did.

Now people are angry about that too.

Well those people are idiots. I didn't read the article, I'm offended by the principle behind it: You shouldn't be considered an authority on sexism just because you have a vagina. Are only black people allowed to be offended by racism? This is bullshit.

I don't understand why the fact that women have weighed in on this debate is worthy of some kind of ethical recognition and, honestly, I think it's pretty pathetic that it's being flaunted as such. Shame on you, Patrick.

Moderator
Posted by CastleD

@Tidel said:

@Stymie said:

I totally agree this statue was lame (but I wouldn't use the word "offensive"; you kind of have to be above things like this). However, I really, truly wish we could have these conversations without the constant tones of "the industry obviously only treats women like this."

How many men do any GB readers know with the super muscular, broad shoulder, 0% body fat, perfect-chizzled-chin look that virtually every male video game character has? Video games are suffering no shortage of manwhores.

The difference is, while the male form is often idealized, it is rarely objectified. It's an important distinction. When male characters are presented as solely a function of desire instead of active participants with agency, then you'd have a similar scenario. But that doesn't happen; and even if it did, it doesn't justify anything. The idea that 'men have it just as bad' doesn't excuse the fact that sexual objectification -- of anyone -- is problematic.

This statue represents the most base scenario of the objectification of women -- it's just a pair of clean, pert tits framed by the gory removal of all possible agency. It doesn't represent the entirety of women in games or gaming, but it exemplifies the persistent inequality in how gender and sex is represented, and to who, and why.

Just because you (or I) are not the 'idealized' man, that doesn't mean the idealized man is reductive of us or reflective of us; it represents a power fantasy. This statue also represents a power fantasy. That's the whole problem.

I think it's worth talking about. I think it's sad and telling that so many duders come out of the woodwork to 'be offended at your offense' and feel embattled.

No one should feel threatened by this discussion. Criticizing a tits-out statue is not defaming men, manliness or threatening any man's right to like tits. It's problematizing the persistent idea that women are frequently reduced to functions of the sexual gratification of men.

Males are less sexually objectified than females because female sexuality is much more powerful than male sexualty. Most people would rather look at the female form than the male form.

Those most responsible for the objectification of women in our modern society are... women. Females in entertainment, especially the music industry, present themselves as sex objects all day, every day. And love all the power and attention it brings them.

Posted by RageKage14

I'm a little weirded out by all these women saying that it's some sort of male pleasure fantasy, or that it exists to titillate men. Do they really think men masturbate to decapitated and bloody torsos?

Posted by whatisdelicious

@Hef said:

@crcruz3 said:

@jaks said:

HAY GUYS LETS FIND OUT WHAT FEMINISTS THINK OF A STATUE OF A PAIR OF BLOODY BOOBS

Seriously, just stop. Patrick, you're in touch with your feminine side. We get it. I know you're going to shake your head and lament about the state of the comments section on the internet while you pat yourself on the back for being Mr. Smartypants, but this is article really lame. Sex is used to sell basically every product in the world other than Polident. Get used to it because it isn't going to stop. That lame Dead Island statue thing was stupid because it was a stupid thing, not because it was a symbol of male chauvinism in a male dominated industry.

You are going to continue to see shit like this because hot people are still the single most effective way of selling products. You're going to continue to see sexy college ladies in bikinis and cowboy hats on beer commercials and you are going to continue to see hot ex NFL players wearing just a towel hawking Old Spice because it has been determined that a lot of women buy their husband's/boyfriend's toiletries.

So just stop.

Please don't try to use common sense here. We are just enjoying ourselves in this very repetitive multi-article discussion about a female torso zombie statue.

100% what Jaks said.

Yep, absolutely. Expressed it perfectly.

Posted by lesaboteur

I don't like the white men in this comment section and their

Thanks Patrick for another awesome article!

Posted by MrGetBonus

@Chavtheworld said:

GUYS SHE'S GOT HER BOOBS SHOWING IT MUST BE SEXIST GUYS

Seriously though, fucking terrible choice for a picture.

Also hilarious.

That's just how she chooses to express herself ok

Edited by Manhattan_Project

This is better than previous articles, but its still not anything more than people stating the same opinion. As I told you through PMs

Posted by Darji

@oldenglishC said:

The whole " Where are the women with opposing viewpoints? " is my favorite argument in the thread so far. That's like being angry at a textbook for not having a counter point to the whole " the earth is round " thing.

The statue to me is still just a silly piece of B-movie kitsch, but the guest writers did an excellent job of explaining why it does have so many people up in arms.

Also: boob baseball cap > boob mug.

I think the article is not even an issue for most people that are complaining. The main problem is the whole current situation. Any Female character that is getting introduced in a video game these days is getting judged it is really tiresome. Lara and Hitman are now torture Porn. ICQ was broght up because it only has a male main char.

The media is blowing this shit way too much up. Maybe it will become better if we actually get news about games and the next generation but at the moment it is just tiresome.

Online
Posted by Ravenlight

@Chavtheworld said:

GUYS SHE'S GOT HER BOOBS SHOWING IT MUST BE SEXIST GUYS

I'm glad you've decided to join me in pointing out sexism wherever it exists!

Posted by mavs

@Bishop113 said:

I'm sure Patrick will be ignoring all these comments and mine will likely be lost in the sea of black and white back and forth hate comments.

But I'll say that the reason this article and all of Klepeck's articles on this subject offend, no frustrate me isn't because it's something different or that I disagree and think that the industry is perfect or that this statue had nothing to do with sexism, I don't, honestly I don't. However what does bother me is that these articles aren't serving to better the industry, they aren't serving as news either, especially this on, you've made an article on this subject, why are you making another one? You're suppose to be the news guy on the site not the shock value click bait guy.

These articles are focusing on telling everyone that men are bad and women deserve better treatment than men because women are special and different, you said it yourself in the previous article "It's different when it's a woman." But if instead you were focusing on the fact that Deep Silver's marketing shouldn't be generalizing their consumer base, if you were trying to show gamers and publishers that gaming has a more diverse crowd than 18 year old dudes then I would be all the way on board. Instead we get this article that talks about nothing but how you and these specific women you chose to put in your article think that the statue is some sexist marketing ploy.

The anonymous respondent said almost exactly what you said in your final paragraph, so I can't see any reason for you to complain about this post.

Posted by leebmx

@Abendlaender said:

Deep Silver likely did not anticipate the intense reaction to its UK-specific Zombie Bait bundle for Dead Island Riptide when it was announced last week.

Really? Cause I haven't heard anybody talking about Riptide before but a hell of a lot of people after

Also I don't really understand how something completely unattractive and gross can be considered "sexist" but I might just be a simpleton. Or a sexist

I think you are confusing 'Sexist' with 'Sexy'

Posted by Mustachio

In a month or so this whole discussion will die down and all we'll be left with is way more people who are now very aware that Dead Island: Riptide is a videogame that is coming out. Like it or not, all this outrage is playing right into the marketer's hands. Also of note was a point the anonymous woman made which is that it is, in a way, sexist towards both genders, not just women. As a product to entice you it is both saying that women as a an audience for this game don't exist or are insignificant, but it is also saying that the people who do want this game are male and therefore will buy anything with tits, even if it's a decapitated corpse. The whole thing is messed up, we can all agree on that, so can we please move on so that we stop giving this game even more free advertising?

Posted by Abendlaender

Okay, even though I should know better (and nobody cares about my opinion) I'm still doing it:

I don't think this statue is sexist. Now sexism is a very real thing and people who think it isn't probably also think racism is not a real thing anymore. Shut up and go back to your cave if this is applying to you.

But....how is this...thing sexist? I'm a man and 'im certainly not looking at this and thinking "Oh yeah, big nice boobies and look as this sexy stump where the head should be. Oh mama!". I'm thinking "WHO THE FUCK wants to put a dismembered torso in his house? And wh...oh my god this is just disgusting!". Now, I'm not saying that just because I don't think it's sexist it's not, I guess I just would have liked some better discussion material on this topic which this article sadly doesn't provide (I feel).

HOWEVER. Reading SOME of the comments here just make me sick and tired so, even though I think Patrick of all people could have handled this a bit better, I still want to thank because doing this is still important. I may not agree with it, but it doesn't change the fact that these women felt offended and that shit like this needs to stop. Cause even if I personally don't feel like this...thing in particular is sexist, there is still a lot of fucking sexism going on, not just in the video game industry. And if the Dead Island statue can be a jumping off point to try and fix that...well even if it's just a try it's worth a try.

And now I'm going back to bed cause I'm sick as hell...

Edited by EnduranceFun

@Sweep said:

@MMann said:

@Sweep said:

I don't understand why the opinions of women were actively sought out in this instance. Are their opinions somehow more valid? Are women entitled to be more insulted? Why is it a big deal that women are weighing in on this?

Because last time this issue was brought up a whole shit-tonne of people made comments saying that P.Klep should do some "real reporting" and go get feedback from actual women instead of just giving his opinion and treating the site like a livejournal.

So he did.

Now people are angry about that too.

Well those people are idiots. I didn't read the article, I'm offended by the principle behind it: You shouldn't be considered an authority on sexism just because you have a vagina. Are only black people allowed to be offended by racism? This is bullshit.

I don't understand why the fact that women have weighed in on this debate is worthy of some kind of ethical recognition and, honestly, I think it's pretty pathetic that it's being flaunted as such. Shame on you, Patrick.

A moderator disagreeing with a staff member's article?

Giant Bomb, I'm sorry, I still love you.

Posted by Aaron_G

There is nothing wrong with have a serious conversation about some of the practices in the video game industry. For thpse that are complaining this is not journalism, um, go watch Fox News or MSNBC or anything "news" related today. Most of it is their opinion or how they want you to perceive the news. What Patrick is doing here is reporting a problem in the industry and reporting a side the sees it as a problem, and there is nothing wrong with that.

Posted by Hilbert

@uomoartificiale said:

@TopCat88 said:

It is a shallow attempt to sell more copies of their game to boys. I agree that it's daft. It is not sexist. Sexist is hating women, not hiring or promoting a woman because of gender or giving a woman a lower salary. A collectible statue of a woman (dismembered, naked, alive, dead or otherwise) isn't sexist. It is distasteful.

No matter how to you put it, "not hiring or promoting a woman because of gender or giving a woman a lower salary", it's sexist and hateful. You see sexism is a social phenomenon based on hate towards women, either explicit or implied. It doesn't matter. Not hiring a woman, "because she's a woman", it's exactly that.

Now, just saying "it's distasteful" is the kind of word juggling we don't need. The attempt to reduce the complexity and gravity of things doesn't help anyone. This case is layered with several things that make it a bad PR stunt: the statue is sexist (again, implicitly or explicitly, it doesn't matter), it's distasteful, and it's a cry for attention. These three points of view don't exclude each other.

I wish the boob statue would also have a cock..

Posted by Brodehouse

@Tidel said:

@Stymie said:

I totally agree this statue was lame (but I wouldn't use the word "offensive"; you kind of have to be above things like this). However, I really, truly wish we could have these conversations without the constant tones of "the industry obviously only treats women like this."

How many men do any GB readers know with the super muscular, broad shoulder, 0% body fat, perfect-chizzled-chin look that virtually every male video game character has? Video games are suffering no shortage of manwhores.

The difference is, while the male form is often idealized, it is rarely objectified. It's an important distinction. When male characters are presented as solely a function of desire instead of active participants with agency, then you'd have a similar scenario. But that doesn't happen; and even if it did, it doesn't justify anything. The idea that 'men have it just as bad' doesn't excuse the fact that sexual objectification -- of anyone -- is problematic.

This statue represents the most base scenario of the objectification of women -- it's just a pair of clean, pert tits framed by the gory removal of all possible agency. It doesn't represent the entirety of women in games or gaming, but it exemplifies the persistent inequality in how gender and sex is represented, and to who, and why.

Just because you (or I) are not the 'idealized' man, that doesn't mean the idealized man is reductive of us or reflective of us; it represents a power fantasy. This statue also represents a power fantasy. That's the whole problem.

I think it's worth talking about. I think it's sad and telling that so many duders come out of the woodwork to 'be offended at your offense' and feel embattled.

No one should feel threatened by this discussion. Criticizing a tits-out statue is not defaming men, manliness or threatening any man's right to like tits. It's problematizing the persistent idea that women are frequently reduced to functions of the sexual gratification of men.

You are exchanging the gender roles of men with women and then drawing conclusions on how they are different.

Men are not objectified by their bodies, for the most part. They are objectified by their production, in a way that women are not. The 'idealized' man is not the body of Nathan Drake or Marcus Fenix; it is their production, their violence and their agency over others. They represent a 'power fantasy' as much as Barbie represents a 'power fantasy' for girls. But despite that, we constantly wring our hands over what Barbie 'says to young girls' but we never really consider what the expression of men as hyperagents does for them. Because it actually does represent the condition of men in society; you are your agency. Without it, you are nothing.

As I've said earlier, the statue is lacking in expressive detail enough to make any actual statements about women (or men). In the same vein that it "doesn't represent the entirety of women in games" it also doesn't represent the entirety of women on Earth. It is white, it is young, it is fit. The only way to hold the claim that the statue makes a gender statement is to also rely on the statue making a racial statement.

No one is threatened by the discussion, in fact, the people who are arguing against it are outright joining in it. The problem appears when the discussion is one-sided, and one side resorts to logical fallacies and the rhetoric that offense is more important than reason.

Posted by Deusx

That thing is horrible. Don't add more wood to the fire though... This article only does that.

Posted by Babylonian

@BlastProcessing said:

At least Patrick didn't quote himself this time. Still, this progressive, Kotaku-esque clickbait shit needs to stop, It's a horrible statue made in bad taste, nothing to cry about.

The fact that you just used the word 'progressive' as a pejorative is FUCKING TERRIFYING to me. Kill all nerds.

Posted by StarvingGamer

@Sweep said:

@MMann said:

@Sweep said:

I don't understand why the opinions of women were actively sought out in this instance. Are their opinions somehow more valid? Are women entitled to be more insulted? Why is it a big deal that women are weighing in on this?

Because last time this issue was brought up a whole shit-tonne of people made comments saying that P.Klep should do some "real reporting" and go get feedback from actual women instead of just giving his opinion and treating the site like a livejournal.

So he did.

Now people are angry about that too.

Well those people are idiots. I didn't read the article, I'm offended by the principle behind it: You shouldn't be considered an authority on sexism just because you have a vagina. Are only black people allowed to be offended by racism? This is bullshit.

I don't understand why the fact that women have weighed in on this debate is worthy of some kind of ethical recognition and, honestly, I think it's pretty pathetic that it's being flaunted as such. Shame on you, Patrick.

<3<3<3

Posted by SadisticWOlf

@joshthebear said:

And here come the assholes in force to yell as loud as they can. If you didn't find the statue absolutely distasteful and disgusting, then I don't know what to think of you.

Pretty sure everyone thinks the statue is disgusting, we just don't need to bring it up every week and use it an excuse to disguise more opinion pieces from the most divisive member of the crew.

Posted by Dylabaloo

@JRock3x8 said:

I guess I don't understand the point of this article. Was anyone expecting to read this and go "OH! THAT'S why it's offensive..." We all knew it was offensive and asking women to confirm that is sort of like asking water to stay wet. Duh.

So what if you got the Cards Against Humanity guys on the phone? If there's anyone who is an EXPERT on what is offensive (and how to toe the line between what is acceptably offensive and unacceptably offensive), it's those guys. What's their take on this?

I like the way you think!

Posted by Zombie_Shakespeare

How do you even know that's a statue of a woman, cis scum?

Posted by Phouchg

Great article and great with the eight different contributors.. makes it clear that your not alone reacting to the ridiculousness of that.. thing.

Posted by SniperXan

@Sweep: This isn't about sexism as a broad idea... it's about women being exploited. Your "Black people only allowed to get angry about racism" doesn't work here... I think your outrage is misplaced and very confusing.

Posted by chrismafuchris

Interesting read

Posted by Babylonian

@lesaboteur said:

I don't like the white men in this comment section and their

This post needs to be on page 20. And also every page. And also every website.

Posted by SomeJerk

If you're going to say that you didn't read an article and still argue against it you're going to make yourself look stupid, if you're a regular user.

Posted by Brodehouse

@Phoenix654 said:

@Zornack said:

Huh, thought I clicked a giantbomb link. How'd I end up on Kotaku?

Not a single opinion that it's simply a stupid statue no one gives a fuck about, just eight paragraphs about how hateful, sexist and misogynistic the video game industry is.

Quality journalism.

Are you a female?

His (or her) gender is completely inconsequential to his argument.

Regarding perspective, you make a misstep. A 'different' perspective does not become superior by nature of being different. Perspective in itself refers to the ability to take a wider array of evidence and use reason to make logical points. That someone has a perspective does not necessarily engender their arguments towards being more or less rational.

Posted by Kingyo

@Langly said:

I can't believe the amount of ridiculous comments on this article. This isn't something you would find on Kotaku, this is a legitimate article that focuses on the wider context of the statue and what it represents. It isn't just a stupid, harmless marketing incident. It's part of a consistent tone that emanates from the games industry and culture.

Stop blathering about militant feminism like 14 year old children.

@quantumjustice said:

Just want to pop in and thank Patrick for being a journalist in a medium that doesn't have many of them, and get out before the insanity makes me even more angry.

Screw the haters Patrick, your a damn cool guy who's damn good at getting the scoop.

Totally agree

@Live_Free_or_Die said:

Here we go again. Patrick trying to be a knight in shining armor for women everywhere. Why aren't there any responses from women who didn't have a problem with the statue?

Perhaps and I'm only guessing here, but just maybe that speaks to the total lack of women, particularly those in the industry, who don't have a problem with this horrible plastic toy aimed at horny 14 year olds...

This is my main problem, everyone complains that our industry isn't taken seriously and is always being pushed around in legislation and in the media. But then someone like Patrick comes along and tries to do a good article ABSENT of his opinion (which every fifth person seems to irrationally complain about) and showing off what some real women in the video game industry think... and everyone acts like children in the comments. Truly it is mind boggling.

Posted by RecSpec

Hey GB community. People in the world see things differently, who knew? To think you're going to end this discussion today is foolish.  
 
I personally see it as a dumb statue, that's it. Am I going to tell someone who thinks it's sexist that it's not? Of course not. We should be appreciating different points of views, not shooting them down because we don't agree. No matter how crazy they seem compared to yours.  

Posted by MMann

@Babylonian said:

@BlastProcessing said:

At least Patrick didn't quote himself this time. Still, this progressive, Kotaku-esque clickbait shit needs to stop, It's a horrible statue made in bad taste, nothing to cry about.

The fact that you just used the word 'progressive' as a pejorative is FUCKING TERRIFYING to me. Kill all nerds.

b..but.. if we don't defend the status quo things might change!

I'm tired of your progressive, pro-equality, ANTIFA agenda Babylonian!

Posted by EnduranceFun

@Babylonian: The utter hypocrisy of this shit blows my mind.

Posted by mavs

@Gremmel said:

Can't be that bad because you keep posting the damn picture of it.......

All this liberal "let's just all get along" bullshit needs to stop soon. You're not solving anything vilifying massive swaths of people, be it men, gamers, women or gun owners.

The statue wasn't hurting anyone, at least not anymore than Django Unchained hurt people and everyone seem fairly fine with that movie. I'm confounded that movies get away with just about anything while the gaming industry is to blame for everything. Are all you liberals really so naive that you think only 13 year old kids who play video games yell "Niggerwhore!" at the top of their lungs when they get excited? I promise you that ain't the case. They learn those words from the man or woman sitting next to you at the office by the way, you know, their parents.

For all you guys who think women need your help. Shush! For all you women who think all men don't respect you. Shush!

Here's the real problem really. Should women have equal pay for equal work done. Obviously. Should that be mandated by law? No but for now it has to be because too many people, including women, don't care! Can this be fixed by being outraged over a GOD DAMN! statue of a grim sex object. Fucking of course not and if you think it does you're still a naive child.

You're not going to change western culture by going "You're the DEVIL!" at everything you don't like. It's not going to work anymore. Even the racists and misogynists are to smart and post-modern to fall for mock shaming anymore. The last thing that worked for was smoking, barely worked for. A twitter uproar lasts for maybe a few days before the cattle move on to the next thing. When was the last time you thought of Kony or Amanda Todd? What did any of that actually do? It made millions of white rich people feel good for a few days but nothing was actually changed in politics by either.

In the end you change peoples opinions about things by having discussions with them. Even raising a child you eventually have to talk to them. My grandparents were racists 10 years ago. They're not anymore. My grandad was a mean drunk 20 years ago, he's not anymore. That wasn't accomplished by the rest of us ignoring their racists remarks or not saying anything. It was just time, and talking.

You're not going to change everyone's mind at once. Again to think that you can is just naive in the sort of connected place we now live in. If you were offended by a torso of a bloody woman without legs, head or arms. Fine. But I really don't care because I don't know you, so SHUSH!

Why should they SHUSH! ? I don't mean that as a challenge, I mean it like:

SHUSH! --> good thing happens

Not SHUSH! --> bad thing happens

That seems to be your argument. Can you explain the connection between SHUSH! and good outcomes?

Posted by boj4ngles

Thank you Patrick for at least trying to help out all the sweaty beard neck virgins in the community. But I doubt they can be saved at this point.

Posted by mrfluke

@Sweep said:

@MMann said:

@Sweep said:

I don't understand why the opinions of women were actively sought out in this instance. Are their opinions somehow more valid? Are women entitled to be more insulted? Why is it a big deal that women are weighing in on this?

Because last time this issue was brought up a whole shit-tonne of people made comments saying that P.Klep should do some "real reporting" and go get feedback from actual women instead of just giving his opinion and treating the site like a livejournal.

So he did.

Now people are angry about that too.

Well those people are idiots. I didn't read the article, I'm offended by the principle behind it: You shouldn't be considered an authority on sexism just because you have a vagina. Are only black people allowed to be offended by racism? This is bullshit.

I don't understand why the fact that women have weighed in on this debate is worthy of some kind of ethical recognition and, honestly, I think it's pretty pathetic that it's being flaunted as such. Shame on you, Patrick.

i shouldnt jump in on this conversation chain considering your a mod and you can kill my account. but hey, discussions right? patrick said thats the ultimate point of these damm articles :P

i agree with you on these women arent "authority figures" and that they shouldn't be considered an authority on sexism because they have a vagina, this piece could really be interpreted as patrick getting more validation on his views as a majority of these women come off as damm feminists to me. (anna is the only one id really listen to as she has the most level headed well rounded opinion)

what would have helped patricks case, is if he got some big male industry people to weigh in on this, that way its more balanced

Posted by whatisdelicious

@Sweep said:

@MMann said:

@Sweep said:

I don't understand why the opinions of women were actively sought out in this instance. Are their opinions somehow more valid? Are women entitled to be more insulted? Why is it a big deal that women are weighing in on this?

Because last time this issue was brought up a whole shit-tonne of people made comments saying that P.Klep should do some "real reporting" and go get feedback from actual women instead of just giving his opinion and treating the site like a livejournal.

So he did.

Now people are angry about that too.

Well those people are idiots. I didn't read the article, I'm offended by the principle behind it: You shouldn't be considered an authority on sexism just because you have a vagina. Are only black people allowed to be offended by racism? This is bullshit.

I don't understand why the fact that women have weighed in on this debate is worthy of some kind of ethical recognition and, honestly, I think it's pretty pathetic that it's being flaunted as such. Shame on you, Patrick.

Same here. It's like he went out and found other 8 people who agree with him who have the right to be offended, and therefore, I'm not allowed to disagree with them. Because they're women. And I'm a man. That's not reporting at all. That's not getting a balanced perspective or digging deep into the issue. This kind of article wouldn't have even been printed in my college newspaper.

Posted by I_smell
@L6M said:

This zombie torso has created a zombie article with zombie opinions with zombie comments by zombie posters.

braaaaaaaaaaiiiiinsss...

I think calling this a "zombie article" is a really excellent way of summing it up.
Posted by Langly

@Sweep said:

@MMann said:

@Sweep said:

I don't understand why the opinions of women were actively sought out in this instance. Are their opinions somehow more valid? Are women entitled to be more insulted? Why is it a big deal that women are weighing in on this?

Because last time this issue was brought up a whole shit-tonne of people made comments saying that P.Klep should do some "real reporting" and go get feedback from actual women instead of just giving his opinion and treating the site like a livejournal.

So he did.

Now people are angry about that too.

Well those people are idiots. I didn't read the article, I'm offended by the principle behind it: You shouldn't be considered an authority on sexism just because you have a vagina. Are only black people allowed to be offended by racism? This is bullshit.

I don't understand why the fact that women have weighed in on this debate is worthy of some kind of ethical recognition and, honestly, I think it's pretty pathetic that it's being flaunted as such. Shame on you, Patrick.

How do you exist as a real person? How are you a moderator?

Did you note that the women who weighed in were in some way affiliated with the industry? That they might have a grasp on the issue in a wider context because they are always engulfed by it? Are you a complete idiot? Their opinion matters because they are constantly affected by the culture at large. And yes, you dumb jerk, people of color have more valid opinions on racism because they are actually affected by the culture of racism. It doesn't make a white person's opinion completely invalid. Women experience objectification and harassment and sexism in a way that you never will. That is what the word "privilege" means. It doesn't mean that you are necessarily financially or even professionally privileged it means that your place in society gives you certain privileges that are not available to people of color or women. You interact with the culture in a different way than they do.

So, yeah, the people actually affected by the culture have a more valid opinion on the situation than you do.

Posted by Ravenlight

I've refreshed this page twice and there aren't three more pages that have appeared. Has everyone got it out of their system already?

Posted by baldgye

@Sweep said:

@MMann said:

@Sweep said:

I don't understand why the opinions of women were actively sought out in this instance. Are their opinions somehow more valid? Are women entitled to be more insulted? Why is it a big deal that women are weighing in on this?

Because last time this issue was brought up a whole shit-tonne of people made comments saying that P.Klep should do some "real reporting" and go get feedback from actual women instead of just giving his opinion and treating the site like a livejournal.

So he did.

Now people are angry about that too.

Well those people are idiots. I didn't read the article, I'm offended by the principle behind it: You shouldn't be considered an authority on sexism just because you have a vagina. Are only black people allowed to be offended by racism? This is bullshit.

I don't understand why the fact that women have weighed in on this debate is worthy of some kind of ethical recognition and, honestly, I think it's pretty pathetic that it's being flaunted as such. Shame on you, Patrick.

Because it's a really easy way to become noticed by people in whatever industry or market you're in. It requires basically no skill, simply that you belong to a demographic and can be easily offended.

If you read what most of them put its over-exaggerated nonsense that makes massive leaps in logic to try and make some nasty bit of plastic have an agenda.

Posted by Nictel

@Chavtheworld said:

GUYS SHE'S GOT HER BOOBS SHOWING IT MUST BE SEXIST GUYS

Seriously though, fucking terrible choice for a picture.

Also hilarious.

You think that's bad?

Rhianna Pratchett

I’m accustomed to game companies marketing towards men. But rarely is it quite so blatantly i.e. "Here are some tits!"

She worked on Tomb Raider and Heavenly Sword. Lets take a look shall we?

PS3 box art (cropped)
360 box art (cropped)

Lets make a game where a girl runs around in her underwear the entire time.

Umm why cut off her face? OW you're concentrating on her boobs.

@asantosbr said:

Good video to counter balance Patrick and these 8 girls opinion:

http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/9noiop/annoyed-gamer-zombie-bikini-bash

I find this much more intelligent. Also he might be right, here in Europe we have more problems with games like Manhunt than we do with boobs. Besides the point that indeed the statue is anything but sexy.

Posted by Kingyo

@TwoSe7enFive said:

Here we go again ...

WE.GET.IT!!!! Bad taste. Female form bad. Video game marketing evil.

I'm really getting tired of this progressive bull-shit.

Progress. I am tired of it. - Giant Bomb User, 2013

Edited by heatDrive88

@Sweep said:

I don't understand why the opinions of women were actively sought out in this instance. Are their opinions somehow more valid? Are women entitled to be more insulted? Why is it a big deal that women are weighing in on this?

Because female voices can be easily lost in the noise of the medium that is still heavily targeted towards a male audience, even if that audience is in fact not completely male. It's not so much about "making a big deal" of their response, as it is to simply bring to the forefront some insight that can be had, regardless if this is an issue about sexism or the poor judgement of a marketing department being paid by Deep Silver.

Maybe it's a bit too much of an extrapolated example, but the fact that one of the responses Patrick chose to highlight was sent in anonymously out of fear of backlash is extremely disappointing and telling. I was pretty sad to read the article when it got to that point, because nobody should have to feel a sense of fear of any kind to simply share an opinion like that - regardless if the person was a man or woman. Given the context of the article, it's safe to assume a female, but still. Fearing any kind of backlash on the basis of a desire to share you opinion is a terrible, terrible thing.