Log in or sign up to comment
2527 Comments
Posted by paulwade1984

Eight great women, eight great responses, one boring liberal to ruin and trivialise it.

Posted by EightBitShik

Seeing as how the woman was British that is your first clue that she was ugly so who cares?

Posted by Archaen

@jmic75 said:

@Nicked said:

@jmic75 said:

The statue is a dumb juvenile object but on it's own, it is not sexist, it is not chauvinistic, it does not promote violence against women. It should not be banned, it'll flop on it's own. I take no issue with articles like this showing up on Giantbomb, but really the most sexist things about this whole thing was Patrick saying that the torso crossed a line because it was a woman (implying there is a difference between the genders when it comes down to the appropriateness of dismembered torsos) and then only getting the opinions of women in the industry. Stuff like this affects men as well as women. I would however like to get opinions from people in the games industry proper, rather than from games writers who will tend to lean towards the more sensationalistic responses and who will cover these subjects on their own sites anyway.

True enough, but surely the statue is in some ways metonymic of the way women are represented by the industry, right? Female characters are overwhelmingly sex objects. Like if you consider a character like Samus who is at first glance decidedly non-sexualized, she ultimately must be made into sex object because she wears latex under her robot-suit-thing. One has to wonder what Master Chief's got on under his own armor... Why don't we ever see him in his skivvies? Point is, there's double standards and sexual exploitation abound in the industry and I think the statue, while being a "dumb juvenile object" is a cold reminder of the way women are near-exclusively represented throughout various media. I'm not saying it's "bad" to like tits or anything, but that we should just be mindful of how we represent gender, race, and so on: A pretty benign point.

Also, I don't think it's reasonable to criticize Patrick for only interviewing women. Giant Bomb almost NEVER has women on podcasts, quick looks, or as the focus of articles. All the editors are male. If you wanted to continue that line of argument what you might suggest is that Giant Bomb interview women in the industry about stuff other than "sexism".

I'd agree that it is the typical way that the industry has traditionally displayed women once they moved out of simply being a collection of pixels. Though I do think the industry as a whole has taken strides towards more realistic depictions of females in games where it makes sense (Beyond good and evil, mirror's edge, the tomb raider reboot, etc), of course there is still work to be done. I say where it makes sense because not all games strive for realistic depiction of characters, male or female. Think of it in terms of comic superheroes, none of them are depicted realistically, they are all idealized versions of both genders that look closer to greek gods and godesses than anyone in real life. Women's secondary sexual characteristics are accentuated obviously (larger bust, lips etc) however so are males (deep voices, large stature, extensive muscles, square jaws, broad shoulders and chest), these are things women look at in males when choosing a sexual partner same as how men look for them in women. So I think a fairer conclusion is that both male and female characters are sexualized, I don't however think they generally made into sex objects.

Saying someone is portrayed as a sex object would imply that they are shown as being solely or primarily used for sex. While Samus clearly is sexualized wearing a latex suit, at no point is she shown as only existing for sex; she is a skilled and capable bounty hunter that saves the federation on a number of occasions and not portrayed as a sex object. A counter point to this would be women in the God of War franchise, who rarely exist for any other reason other than for Kratos to have a sex minigame with them, in this case the women are both sexualized and are portrayed to be sex objects.

As to your question about Master Chief isn't he wielded in there or something? lol A serious answer though is to not compare male vs female characters from two different franchises, but rather from the same universe. If it is something dumb like males wear huge suits of armour while females wear tiny chainmail bikinis I'm right there with you, that makes no sense. Though if both Men and Women are wearing skimpy outfits, or neither are that's fine and consistent between the genders. If you compare male and female spartans in Halo you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between the two:

http://www.gameinformer.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Components-ImageFileViewer/CommunityServer-Blogs-Components-WeblogFiles-00-00-00-00-09/8306.HaloReach.jpg_2D00_610x0.jpg

I do think it's fair to criticize Patrick, because he specifically went out of his way to ONLY get women's input on the subject. Giantbomb may be lacking in Female editors but that wasn't an active decision (well one would hope it wasn't), it was how things shook out, they didn't decided to only get input from men, and only cater to men (as Femmegamer seems to have done for the opposite gender, but that's a whole other kettle of fish). Of course I would want Giant bomb to interview women on stuff other than "sexism", to not do so would be insulting to women, insinuating that "sexism" is the only thing they would be knowledgeable about in the games industry. Much in the same way it is insulting to not get some male perspective on the topic insinuating you are only interested on one gender's take on the subject or you believe only one gender will have important input. Of course I'm not going to hold any of this against the guy, but to call a statue sexist, and then turn around and only get one gender's opinion on the subject is kind of a gauche thing to do.

So in conclusion chainmail bikinis are dumb...unless guys are wearing them too, which no one should anyway because I bet they chafe.

I appreciate this post. Unfortunately you displayed genuine insight, so no one is going to comment on it.

Posted by jmic75

@TrevorCCW said:

As gamers, we should be offended that this type of marketing is what elements of the industry think we respond to.

As men, we should be offended that expectations of us are so low that we are supposed to be titillated by a fraction of a woman and the aftermath of violence.

As human beings, we should be having these conversations about what these labels and expectations and depictions are saying about our culture.

As privileged Westerners, we need to be sensitive that it's worse elsewhere, but also of the fact that our own mothers and sisters and girlfriends and daughters and wives are still being marginalized.

Conclusion: fuck you little pricks, seriously. Klepek reached out to informed industry professionals who you've infantilized and dismissed without addressing their arguments. Also go read some books about this shit and see how quickly your opinion changes.

This is the Mass Effect 3 of posts, you had something good going, but you blew the ending so bad it hurt the rest of the post retroactively.

Posted by Mimekiller

wow 8 people who agree with each other/have the same opinion. Stimulating stuff.

Edited by graf1k

@TrevorCCW said:

As gamers, we should be offended that this type of marketing is what elements of the industry think we respond to.

As men, we should be offended that expectations of us are so low that we are supposed to be titillated by a fraction of a woman and the aftermath of violence.

As human beings, we should be having these conversations about what these labels and expectations and depictions are saying about our culture.

As privileged Westerners, we need to be sensitive that it's worse elsewhere, but also of the fact that our own mothers and sisters and girlfriends and daughters and wives are still being marginalized.

Conclusion: fuck you little pricks, seriously. Klepek reached out to informed industry professionals who you've infantilized and dismissed without addressing their arguments. Also go read some books about this shit and see how quickly your opinion changes.

Your main point, on which the rest of your post seems to hinge, is frankly, stupid. I should be offended because some people that probably don't play video games that work in advertising think that somebody will respond to their low-brow marketing that caters to the lowest common denominator? Should I be offended at the existence of all reality TV then? Should I be offended at the existence of Maxim and FHM magazines? Should I be offended by GoDaddy.com ads? Should I be offended by the Victoria Secret fashion show, Calvin Klein underwear ads and a hundred other things? Because by your dumb-fuck logic, I should go around all day constantly being offended.

All these things are a question of taste. I look at reality TV and think "That looks terrible, I'm not going to watch that" just the way I looked at this retarded bust and said "That thing looks terrible, I would never buy that". That's as far as I'm willing to go in both cases personally. What I find offensive, if anything, is not the existence of all these things but the popularity of them. The fact that it's almost easier to get people in this country to vote on American Idol than it is to get people to vote for congressional elections, THAT OFFENDS ME. That fact that people actually buy Maxim magazine or watch all this bullshit shlock television OFFENDS ME. The fact that science and education in this country is stymied by people who believe in a big magic man in the sky, THAT OFFENDS ME. And yes, if that bust went on sale and sold out, THAT would have offended me. But no, ad men being unclever and having a childish opinion of people in an industry they clearly have no grasp of does not offend me, it just makes me sad. And for sad, I'm not willing to work myself up into some bullshit hypothetical situation in which someone buys this fucking statue and decides "Bro, this Dead Island bust is so awesome! I think I'LL go out and rape a girl and fucking decapitate her!" or that this somehow validates a sexist persons opinions, or that women's wages will go down as a result of this thing. That's giving gamers the same amount of credit as politicians that say "violent video games is the reason for school shootings." That's a bullshit leap of logic.

Whereas I bet if you look back, when that one asshole involved in the Capcom fighting show mercilessly harassed the female player because he's a dickless piece of shit that needs to bully a girl to feel tough, the female player and not the asshole had almost total support from the gaming community, or at least those who cared to weigh in on the subject. This is not that same situation. Nobody was being directly hurt, or bullied or demeaned by this ridiculous pack in and it should have been a completely moot issue once it was pulled from preorder. If anything, it should have damaged the reputation of Deep Silver and whoever the marketing team that approved or put forth this promotion, not the gaming public en masse.

I do not accept any guilt by association just because I think the whole thing is stupid and being blown out of proportion.

Posted by golguin

I obviously haven't read through the whole thread, but I'm sure people have brought up the scope of the problem caused by the statue in comparison to other stories in the real news that hurts women. What was said and how did people react to that argument?

A fun story that came out a few weeks ago was about that woman who was fired for being too hot for her boss and the court that agreed with that claim. How would people rate the statue and the firing in terms of damage and how would you compare them?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/10/melissa-nelson-dental-assistant-fired-hot_n_2444222.html

Posted by RainbowRaccoon

@Skeezard said:

Patrick is the Britta of the GiantBomb crew

Haha yes! Awesome reference.

Edited by ProfessorEss

@Meowshi said:

I really hate this attitude that if something doesn't personally offend you, it shouldn't offend anybody. Similar to what Jeff said, I don't personally find this all that offensive, but enough people I trust do, so there's likely something there.

The thing is I've asked around a bit and I can't find any real-world women in my real-world life that find this offensive - I mean even a little bit. I find I strange that Patrick reached out to eight people and all eight were offended whereas I can't find any (except for my mom, but she's old fashioned and offended by almost all of today's entertainment).

So if I'm not offended, and I can't find anyone I love, trust and/or respect who are offended ('cept fer you mom, xoxo) am I still supposed to find it offensive because a stranger wrote an article about eight strangers (none of which I know, trust or respect) who were offended?

Posted by chazzadan

I'm a girl and this is not offensive to me in any way. I'm just disappointed that is not 'zombie enough' its quite plain really. would sell better if it resembled the game and zombies a bit more. I'd love a set of the characters all zombified!

Posted by jmic75

@Meowshi said:

@Missacre said:

@Captainlunchbox said:

@Missacre: "White knight brigade." "Feminist-run world"

See, you're dehumanizing the people affected by stuff like this. No, I'm not talking about the statue, but rather the rampant stupidity. It's really just a lot of men in the industry being totally inconsiderate. It's almost this fratboy mentality and it's kind of embarrassing. It isn't just another internet flamewar. It isn't restricted to a thread or an article. It's very real and it sucks.

People affected? If there's a group of people whose lives were destroyed just by looking at this statue, then they have a fucked-up sense of priority. The games industry still has your so-called "fratboy mentality because the majority of people who play games are still males. It's not gonna change overnight just because a few females suddenly decided that they want to play games and then they decided that they want the industry to change to specifically suit their "needs." Like it or not, it's not gonna change anytime soon.

How does it suck exactly? Is it affecting your life in some way? To tell you the truth, it's affecting no one, this is a perfect example of a "first-world problem.' It's nothing more, nothing less. I mean, come on, people are complaining about a statue and calling it sexist, when actual oppressed women in the third world laugh at our ignorance. This is yet another reason the rest of the world hates us, and frankly, I'm starting to agree with them. We make mountains out of molehills like this. THAT'S what's embarrassing.

I really hate this attitude that if something doesn't personally offend you, it shouldn't offend anybody. Similar to what Jeff said, I don't personally find this all that offensive, but enough people I trust do, so there's likely something there.

I thought this comic strip has an interesting take on the whole offensive thing.

http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2164

Posted by Krullban

@bibamatt said:

@EnduranceFun said:

@bibamatt: That happened. It was mostly just Patrick being snarky and dishing out one-liners to those who disagreed with the article, and approving of those that agreed. Not much more than that.

Was it in this thread?

Yeah, a little bit. He responded to a couple of pointless couple word responses that didn't say much with snarky one liners as EnduranceFun said, and ignored the actual arguments going against him that said it in a respectable manner.

Posted by EnduranceFun

@bibamatt: Yeah, relatively early on.

Edited by jmic75

@Nicked said:

@jmic75 said:

The statue is a dumb juvenile object but on it's own, it is not sexist, it is not chauvinistic, it does not promote violence against women. It should not be banned, it'll flop on it's own. I take no issue with articles like this showing up on Giantbomb, but really the most sexist things about this whole thing was Patrick saying that the torso crossed a line because it was a woman (implying there is a difference between the genders when it comes down to the appropriateness of dismembered torsos) and then only getting the opinions of women in the industry. Stuff like this affects men as well as women. I would however like to get opinions from people in the games industry proper, rather than from games writers who will tend to lean towards the more sensationalistic responses and who will cover these subjects on their own sites anyway.

True enough, but surely the statue is in some ways metonymic of the way women are represented by the industry, right? Female characters are overwhelmingly sex objects. Like if you consider a character like Samus who is at first glance decidedly non-sexualized, she ultimately must be made into sex object because she wears latex under her robot-suit-thing. One has to wonder what Master Chief's got on under his own armor... Why don't we ever see him in his skivvies? Point is, there's double standards and sexual exploitation abound in the industry and I think the statue, while being a "dumb juvenile object" is a cold reminder of the way women are near-exclusively represented throughout various media. I'm not saying it's "bad" to like tits or anything, but that we should just be mindful of how we represent gender, race, and so on: A pretty benign point.

Also, I don't think it's reasonable to criticize Patrick for only interviewing women. Giant Bomb almost NEVER has women on podcasts, quick looks, or as the focus of articles. All the editors are male. If you wanted to continue that line of argument what you might suggest is that Giant Bomb interview women in the industry about stuff other than "sexism".

I'd agree that it is the typical way that the industry has traditionally displayed women once they moved out of simply being a collection of pixels. Though I do think the industry as a whole has taken strides towards more realistic depictions of females in games where it makes sense (Beyond good and evil, mirror's edge, the tomb raider reboot, etc), of course there is still work to be done. I say where it makes sense because not all games strive for realistic depiction of characters, male or female. Think of it in terms of comic superheroes, none of them are depicted realistically, they are all idealized versions of both genders that look closer to greek gods and godesses than anyone in real life. Women's secondary sexual characteristics are accentuated obviously (larger bust, lips etc) however so are males (deep voices, large stature, extensive muscles, square jaws, broad shoulders and chest), these are things women look at in males when choosing a sexual partner same as how men look for them in women. So I think a fairer conclusion is that both male and female characters are sexualized, I don't however think they generally made into sex objects.

Saying someone is portrayed as a sex object would imply that they are shown as being solely or primarily used for sex. While Samus clearly is sexualized wearing a latex suit, at no point is she shown as only existing for sex; she is a skilled and capable bounty hunter that saves the federation on a number of occasions and not portrayed as a sex object. A counter point to this would be women in the God of War franchise, who rarely exist for any other reason other than for Kratos to have a sex minigame with them, in this case the women are both sexualized and are portrayed to be sex objects.

As to your question about Master Chief isn't he wielded in there or something? lol A serious answer though is to not compare male vs female characters from two different franchises, but rather from the same universe. If it is something dumb like males wear huge suits of armour while females wear tiny chainmail bikinis I'm right there with you, that makes no sense. Though if both Men and Women are wearing skimpy outfits, or neither are that's fine and consistent between the genders. If you compare male and female spartans in Halo you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between the two:

http://www.gameinformer.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Components-ImageFileViewer/CommunityServer-Blogs-Components-WeblogFiles-00-00-00-00-09/8306.HaloReach.jpg_2D00_610x0.jpg

I do think it's fair to criticize Patrick, because he specifically went out of his way to ONLY get women's input on the subject. Giantbomb may be lacking in Female editors but that wasn't an active decision (well one would hope it wasn't), it was how things shook out, they didn't decided to only get input from men, and only cater to men (as Femmegamer seems to have done for the opposite gender, but that's a whole other kettle of fish). Of course I would want Giant bomb to interview women on stuff other than "sexism", to not do so would be insulting to women, insinuating that "sexism" is the only thing they would be knowledgeable about in the games industry. Much in the same way it is insulting to not get some male perspective on the topic insinuating you are only interested on one gender's take on the subject or you believe only one gender will have important input. Of course I'm not going to hold any of this against the guy, but to call a statue sexist, and then turn around and only get one gender's opinion on the subject is kind of a gauche thing to do.

So in conclusion chainmail bikinis are dumb...unless guys are wearing them too, which no one should anyway because I bet they chafe.

Edited by crcruz3

@Missacre said:

@Captainlunchbox said:

@Missacre: "White knight brigade." "Feminist-run world"

See, you're dehumanizing the people affected by stuff like this. No, I'm not talking about the statue, but rather the rampant stupidity. It's really just a lot of men in the industry being totally inconsiderate. It's almost this fratboy mentality and it's kind of embarrassing. It isn't just another internet flamewar. It isn't restricted to a thread or an article. It's very real and it sucks.

People affected? If there's a group of people whose lives were destroyed just by looking at this statue, then they have a fucked-up sense of priority. The games industry still has your so-called "fratboy mentality because the majority of people who play games are still males. It's not gonna change overnight just because a few females suddenly decided that they want to play games and then they decided that they want the industry to change to specifically suit their "needs." Like it or not, it's not gonna change anytime soon.

How does it suck exactly? Is it affecting your life in some way? To tell you the truth, it's affecting no one, this is a perfect example of a "first-world problem.' It's nothing more, nothing less. I mean, come on, people are complaining about a statue and calling it sexist, when actual oppressed women in the third world laugh at our ignorance. This is yet another reason the rest of the world hates us, and frankly, I'm starting to agree with them. We make mountains out of molehills like this. THAT'S what's embarrassing.

More than 2.2 million people visit Giantbomb every month. If you check it you'll realize that 100 (200?) people bitching over and over in a thread like this one is not that much. I live in the third world and I think that the US is great, I've been there many times and I hope to be able to keep visiting your beautiful country.

Posted by bibamatt

@EnduranceFun said:

@bibamatt: That happened. It was mostly just Patrick being snarky and dishing out one-liners to those who disagreed with the article, and approving of those that agreed. Not much more than that.

Was it in this thread?

Posted by EnduranceFun

@bibamatt: That happened. It was mostly just Patrick being snarky and dishing out one-liners to those who disagreed with the article, and approving of those that agreed. Not much more than that.

Posted by bibamatt

I think I missed the 'Patrick responding to the comments'. Did that happen yet? The article just says 11:30 a.m. PST, with no day specified.

Posted by BawlZINmotion

@FancySoapsMan: Which is funny because Bioware has consistently been one of the most gender neutral companies around. The design of their female characters is completely stereotypical, but so are their male characters. Hetero sexual guys like to look at attractive women, even if they are proportionally exaggerated. I imagine many hetero sexual women like to look at men.

I'm not sure how one of the articles' women draws a parallel to that abduction/murder in Australia with the idea behind this statue. It's from a zombie game that takes place on a tropical island, where I imagine there would be a lot of women, and men, half-naked. So I imagined it seemed appropriate within the context of their product. If this was a game about abducting, molesting and murdering women that offered customers a statue of a gagged, bound and badly beaten (or dead) female, that would be different. Zombies do not exist, this is a fantasy world. I also imagine that somewhere on the beach there is a probably a severed cock. That would be the ultimate return fire for the developer eh? Offer customers a statue of a severed cock as an option, just so the genders are equal.

I could go on a rant about women objectifying themselves, but I doubt that would get much support. Nor is it quite within topic boundaries.

Posted by Captainlunchbox

@Missacre said:

@Captainlunchbox said:

@Missacre: "White knight brigade." "Feminist-run world"

See, you're dehumanizing the people affected by stuff like this. No, I'm not talking about the statue, but rather the rampant stupidity. It's really just a lot of men in the industry being totally inconsiderate. It's almost this fratboy mentality and it's kind of embarrassing. It isn't just another internet flamewar. It isn't restricted to a thread or an article. It's very real and it sucks.

People affected? If there's a group of people whose lives were destroyed just by looking at this statue, then they have a fucked-up sense of priority. The games industry still has your so-called "fratboy mentality because the majority of people who play games are still males. It's not gonna change overnight just because a few females suddenly decided that they want to play games and then they decided that they want the industry to change to specifically suit their "needs." Like it or not, it's not gonna change anytime soon.

How does it suck exactly? Is it affecting your life in some way? To tell you the truth, it's affecting no one, this is a perfect example of a "first-world problem.' It's nothing more, nothing less. I mean, come on, people are complaining about a statue and calling it sexist, when actual oppressed women in the third world laugh at our ignorance. This is yet another reason the rest of the world hates us, and frankly, I'm starting to agree with them. We make mountains out of molehills like this. THAT'S what's embarrassing.

It sucks because, I dunno man, call it "empathy." I have that, and that's why I think the state of things needs to change. Fuck status quo. Just because something is a certain way doesn't make it right, which is what you seem to try and justify here. And it's not just females wanting to game- it's also the sexism perpetrated against those who are in the industry. I'm not going to contribute to the "It's a boy's club" circlejerk. So I guess I'm just saying "have a little empathy." Just because something doesn't hit you directly doesn't mean it doesn't affect someone else.

Posted by Meowshi

@Missacre said:

@Captainlunchbox said:

@Missacre: "White knight brigade." "Feminist-run world"

See, you're dehumanizing the people affected by stuff like this. No, I'm not talking about the statue, but rather the rampant stupidity. It's really just a lot of men in the industry being totally inconsiderate. It's almost this fratboy mentality and it's kind of embarrassing. It isn't just another internet flamewar. It isn't restricted to a thread or an article. It's very real and it sucks.

People affected? If there's a group of people whose lives were destroyed just by looking at this statue, then they have a fucked-up sense of priority. The games industry still has your so-called "fratboy mentality because the majority of people who play games are still males. It's not gonna change overnight just because a few females suddenly decided that they want to play games and then they decided that they want the industry to change to specifically suit their "needs." Like it or not, it's not gonna change anytime soon.

How does it suck exactly? Is it affecting your life in some way? To tell you the truth, it's affecting no one, this is a perfect example of a "first-world problem.' It's nothing more, nothing less. I mean, come on, people are complaining about a statue and calling it sexist, when actual oppressed women in the third world laugh at our ignorance. This is yet another reason the rest of the world hates us, and frankly, I'm starting to agree with them. We make mountains out of molehills like this. THAT'S what's embarrassing.

I really hate this attitude that if something doesn't personally offend you, it shouldn't offend anybody. Similar to what Jeff said, I don't personally find this all that offensive, but enough people I trust do, so there's likely something there.

Posted by Meowshi

@Paindamnation said:

It's your idiotic replies that continue to keep this page going. So feel free to quote me on that.

My mistake, I thought I was having a conversation with a fellow adult. Forget I said anything.

Posted by Jonny_Anonymous

@flamingeyebrows said:

So this is gonna be one of those comment threads where all the neckbeard misogynists come out to play, is it?

Posted by BRNK

Fuck, man. The response to this article is depressing. I'd really like to think there's more empathy in this world.

Posted by Nicked

@jmic75 said:

The statue is a dumb juvenile object but on it's own, it is not sexist, it is not chauvinistic, it does not promote violence against women. It should not be banned, it'll flop on it's own. I take no issue with articles like this showing up on Giantbomb, but really the most sexist things about this whole thing was Patrick saying that the torso crossed a line because it was a woman (implying there is a difference between the genders when it comes down to the appropriateness of dismembered torsos) and then only getting the opinions of women in the industry. Stuff like this affects men as well as women. I would however like to get opinions from people in the games industry proper, rather than from games writers who will tend to lean towards the more sensationalistic responses and who will cover these subjects on their own sites anyway.

True enough, but surely the statue is in some ways metonymic of the way women are represented by the industry, right? Female characters are overwhelmingly sex objects. Like if you consider a character like Samus who is at first glance decidedly non-sexualized, she ultimately must be made into sex object because she wears latex under her robot-suit-thing. One has to wonder what Master Chief's got on under his own armor... Why don't we ever see him in his skivvies? Point is, there's double standards and sexual exploitation abound in the industry and I think the statue, while being a "dumb juvenile object" is a cold reminder of the way women are near-exclusively represented throughout various media. I'm not saying it's "bad" to like tits or anything, but that we should just be mindful of how we represent gender, race, and so on: A pretty benign point.

Also, I don't think it's reasonable to criticize Patrick for only interviewing women. Giant Bomb almost NEVER has women on podcasts, quick looks, or as the focus of articles. All the editors are male. If you wanted to continue that line of argument what you might suggest is that Giant Bomb interview women in the industry about stuff other than "sexism".

Online
Posted by EXTomar

If I might be so bold: Complaining that people are "...make(ing) mountains out of molehills..." is yet another aspect of "making mountains out of molehills".

It is fine to critique things. It is fine to critique things that have sexual connotations. As strange as it is to suggest, adults can do this without hating each other. When someone says "I thought this was stupid and sexist" they aren't blowing it out of proportion unless they are posting it hundreds of times.

Posted by Missacre

@Captainlunchbox said:

@Missacre: "White knight brigade." "Feminist-run world"

See, you're dehumanizing the people affected by stuff like this. No, I'm not talking about the statue, but rather the rampant stupidity. It's really just a lot of men in the industry being totally inconsiderate. It's almost this fratboy mentality and it's kind of embarrassing. It isn't just another internet flamewar. It isn't restricted to a thread or an article. It's very real and it sucks.

People affected? If there's a group of people whose lives were destroyed just by looking at this statue, then they have a fucked-up sense of priority. The games industry still has your so-called "fratboy mentality because the majority of people who play games are still males. It's not gonna change overnight just because a few females suddenly decided that they want to play games and then they decided that they want the industry to change to specifically suit their "needs." Like it or not, it's not gonna change anytime soon.

How does it suck exactly? Is it affecting your life in some way? To tell you the truth, it's affecting no one, this is a perfect example of a "first-world problem.' It's nothing more, nothing less. I mean, come on, people are complaining about a statue and calling it sexist, when actual oppressed women in the third world laugh at our ignorance. This is yet another reason the rest of the world hates us, and frankly, I'm starting to agree with them. We make mountains out of molehills like this. THAT'S what's embarrassing.

Edited by EXTomar

It is kind of typical that instead of engaging in a discussion on something that has to do with sex is to retort with a derogatory sexual put down. It is fine to have the opposite opinion. It isn't fine to just disregard all discussion. It is not fine to reject any discussion as "feminist propaganda" because male or female there is something interesting going on here.

To me the real story here is how this item is a mirror reflecting on the gamer consumer. Someone over there thought this appealed to fans of Dead Island. Why did they think that in the first place?

Posted by Captainlunchbox

@Missacre: "White knight brigade." "Feminist-run world"

See, you're dehumanizing the people affected by stuff like this. No, I'm not talking about the statue, but rather the rampant stupidity. It's really just a lot of men in the industry being totally inconsiderate. It's almost this fratboy mentality and it's kind of embarrassing. It isn't just another internet flamewar. It isn't restricted to a thread or an article. It's very real and it sucks.

Posted by NeoZeon

Honestly I could care less about whether or not the thing offends people.

My only real concern is if any made it to a store shelf somewhere, cause if it did and I find it? Well shit, that is easy money to be made off of some controversy-loving sucker.

Posted by Plipster

@CarlosTheDwarf said:

@JasonR86 said:

@ptys said:

Giant Bomb really need to hire a female editor...

Oh God I would love to see the forums after that. They would fucking lose their shit.

Not if she actually wrote about gaming instead of freshman-level feminism LiveJournal posts. I'd love to see a decent, mature female member on the team instead of Patrick's insufferable adolescent political soapboxing. I suspect most would agree with me.

Boom.

Posted by Scooper

Awful article from an awful writer.

Edited by Paindamnation

@Meowshi: No. The fact she originally ranted about "sexism" and "how this is so wrong and degrading" however she was dressing in cosplay in obviously a sexual manner, then "immediately" took it down.Because she said "there's a time and place for cosplay" It's your idiotic replies that continue to keep this page going. So feel free to quote me on that. So continue to defend people who have voices themselfs. I know what I'm typing by the way. I'm going to continue riding the riptide.

edit: Best damn thing said about this whole thing

Anonymous

I didn't feel offended by the Dead Island bikini statue. I did, however, find it quite tiresome"

Should have ended there. Didn't need 2,000 comments "defending women" they have mouths and hands, most likely, maybe robotic ones. They don't need "saviors" of the internet. The statue looks fine. Wanna know the reason why they were gonna sell it? Cause sex sells. I never agreed to it, nor do I dismiss it. Do you see super bowl adds with women wearing conservative clothing? Do you see cheerleaders wearing pants? No. While it is outdated thinking that women are not an audience for gaming, and that when women are seen gaming men swarm like bears to honey, it's a statue. You don't have to buy it, you don't even have to look at it. However, you cannot deny that sex sells. Now prove me right by replying with erroneous comments about women in the industry or how sex doesn't sell, I'll watch my 15 commercial during the basketball game that proves otherwise.

Posted by Meowshi

@Paindamnation said:

@jmic75 said:

For the most part I thought the opinions by the authors were fair. I do take issue with:

Ms. Meadows arguing that women who would have no intention to buy this special edition anyway should complain about it so that it doesn't get sold. To me this thinking is on par with vegetarians yelling that meat is murder or Peta folks yelling that fur is murder. These tactics are basically designed to bully people into doing something you want them to do. If you don't like it, fine, don't buy it, you've spoken with your dollars and if enough people agree with you, they'll never do something like this again because it'll cost them money. Having a small vocal minority imposing their will onto everyone else is not something I can support. As to her boob job comment, classical sculptures were also stylised to reflect the notion of female beauty at the time, and gravity was also a lot weaker back then as well.

Ms. DeLoria's whole rant was just irrelevant sensationalism. Most people clearly understand the difference between real murder and a dumb zombie torso. To make the insinuation that this statue encourages people to think of violent murder and sex as being intertwined is taking a bit of a leap.

Ms. Hunter takes the odd (in my opinion) stance that the statue looks too much like dead meat, which kinda seemed like the point. She would have preferred a statue like the venus di milo, however wouldn't making a statue more realistic or in a more visually pleasing position work more towards the objectification of women that she is against? Men who objectify women don't actually see them as chunks of meat, they view them as attractive-sexual objects who solely exist to full fill their needs. I am in no way saying that this statue actively works against this objectification in men, but I seriously doubt it encourages in, and making the statue look like anything other than a chunk of meat (something not sexual for most normal people) would have made it worse. Making an inanimate object sexy does not foster the gender relation ideas of men having dominance over women who exist only as sexual objects, as no social interaction is depicted. If you wanted to argue that pornography or even older James Bond movies encouraged objectification I'd agree with you because they show relations where women are being submissive and usually only appear for sex with men.

Ms. Cooke's assertion that the statue is sexist because of the proportions doesn't really hold water. How is creating a statue with idealised proportions sexist? It makes no value statements about a woman's worth as being lower than a man's nor does it suggest any sort of gender stereotype. You may not like the mainstream's view of what idealised beauty is and the unrealistic depiction of a woman's body definitely contributes to poor body image for a lot of girls and women, however it is not sexist.

As to the complains that not showing damage on the breasts makes it worse, they could have shown tears on the bathing suit to show exposed breasts which would have been way worse, and had they showed a chunk out of the breasts tissue, as dumb as it is, I'm sure that would have violated some indecency law about showing "exposed" breasts.

The statue is a dumb juvenile object but on it's own, it is not sexist, it is not chauvinistic, it does not promote violence against women. It should not be banned, it'll flop on it's own. I take no issue with articles like this showing up on Giantbomb, but really the most sexist things about this whole thing was Patrick saying that the torso crossed a line because it was a woman (implying there is a difference between the genders when it comes down to the appropriateness of dismembered torsos) and then only getting the opinions of women in the industry. Stuff like this affects men as well as women. I would however like to get opinions from people in the games industry proper, rather than from games writers who will tend to lean towards the more sensationalistic responses and who will cover these subjects on their own sites anyway.

Damn. This is first comment out of..What..2,000 useless comments, that I like. So thank you.

Also, that little miss Deloria decided to change her picture because she thought her "Cosplay" routine, wasn't appropriate", honestly she had more cleavage showing then the statue. So anything "Sexist" from her side I immediately dismiss.

Wait, what?

So women who wear low-cut outfits aren't allowed to express their feelings regarding sexism?

Do you even realize what you're typing when you say it?

Edited by Paindamnation

@jmic75 said:

For the most part I thought the opinions by the authors were fair. I do take issue with:

Ms. Meadows arguing that women who would have no intention to buy this special edition anyway should complain about it so that it doesn't get sold. To me this thinking is on par with vegetarians yelling that meat is murder or Peta folks yelling that fur is murder. These tactics are basically designed to bully people into doing something you want them to do. If you don't like it, fine, don't buy it, you've spoken with your dollars and if enough people agree with you, they'll never do something like this again because it'll cost them money. Having a small vocal minority imposing their will onto everyone else is not something I can support. As to her boob job comment, classical sculptures were also stylised to reflect the notion of female beauty at the time, and gravity was also a lot weaker back then as well.

Ms. DeLoria's whole rant was just irrelevant sensationalism. Most people clearly understand the difference between real murder and a dumb zombie torso. To make the insinuation that this statue encourages people to think of violent murder and sex as being intertwined is taking a bit of a leap.

Ms. Hunter takes the odd (in my opinion) stance that the statue looks too much like dead meat, which kinda seemed like the point. She would have preferred a statue like the venus di milo, however wouldn't making a statue more realistic or in a more visually pleasing position work more towards the objectification of women that she is against? Men who objectify women don't actually see them as chunks of meat, they view them as attractive-sexual objects who solely exist to full fill their needs. I am in no way saying that this statue actively works against this objectification in men, but I seriously doubt it encourages in, and making the statue look like anything other than a chunk of meat (something not sexual for most normal people) would have made it worse. Making an inanimate object sexy does not foster the gender relation ideas of men having dominance over women who exist only as sexual objects, as no social interaction is depicted. If you wanted to argue that pornography or even older James Bond movies encouraged objectification I'd agree with you because they show relations where women are being submissive and usually only appear for sex with men.

Ms. Cooke's assertion that the statue is sexist because of the proportions doesn't really hold water. How is creating a statue with idealised proportions sexist? It makes no value statements about a woman's worth as being lower than a man's nor does it suggest any sort of gender stereotype. You may not like the mainstream's view of what idealised beauty is and the unrealistic depiction of a woman's body definitely contributes to poor body image for a lot of girls and women, however it is not sexist.

As to the complains that not showing damage on the breasts makes it worse, they could have shown tears on the bathing suit to show exposed breasts which would have been way worse, and had they showed a chunk out of the breasts tissue, as dumb as it is, I'm sure that would have violated some indecency law about showing "exposed" breasts.

The statue is a dumb juvenile object but on it's own, it is not sexist, it is not chauvinistic, it does not promote violence against women. It should not be banned, it'll flop on it's own. I take no issue with articles like this showing up on Giantbomb, but really the most sexist things about this whole thing was Patrick saying that the torso crossed a line because it was a woman (implying there is a difference between the genders when it comes down to the appropriateness of dismembered torsos) and then only getting the opinions of women in the industry. Stuff like this affects men as well as women. I would however like to get opinions from people in the games industry proper, rather than from games writers who will tend to lean towards the more sensationalistic responses and who will cover these subjects on their own sites anyway.

Damn. This is first comment out of..What..2,000 useless comments, that I like. So thank you.

Also, that little miss Deloria decided to change her picture because she thought her "Cosplay" routine, wasn't appropriate", honestly she had more cleavage showing then the statue. So anything "Sexist" from her side I immediately dismiss.

Posted by jmic75

For the most part I thought the opinions by the authors were fair. I do take issue with:

Ms. Meadows arguing that women who would have no intention to buy this special edition anyway should complain about it so that it doesn't get sold. To me this thinking is on par with vegetarians yelling that meat is murder or Peta folks yelling that fur is murder. These tactics are basically designed to bully people into doing something you want them to do. If you don't like it, fine, don't buy it, you've spoken with your dollars and if enough people agree with you, they'll never do something like this again because it'll cost them money. Having a small vocal minority imposing their will onto everyone else is not something I can support. As to her boob job comment, classical sculptures were also stylised to reflect the notion of female beauty at the time, and gravity was also a lot weaker back then as well.

Ms. DeLoria's whole rant was just irrelevant sensationalism. Most people clearly understand the difference between real murder and a dumb zombie torso. To make the insinuation that this statue encourages people to think of violent murder and sex as being intertwined is taking a bit of a leap.

Ms. Hunter takes the odd (in my opinion) stance that the statue looks too much like dead meat, which kinda seemed like the point. She would have preferred a statue like the venus di milo, however wouldn't making a statue more realistic or in a more visually pleasing position work more towards the objectification of women that she is against? Men who objectify women don't actually see them as chunks of meat, they view them as attractive-sexual objects who solely exist to full fill their needs. I am in no way saying that this statue actively works against this objectification in men, but I seriously doubt it encourages in, and making the statue look like anything other than a chunk of meat (something not sexual for most normal people) would have made it worse. Making an inanimate object sexy does not foster the gender relation ideas of men having dominance over women who exist only as sexual objects, as no social interaction is depicted. If you wanted to argue that pornography or even older James Bond movies encouraged objectification I'd agree with you because they show relations where women are being submissive and usually only appear for sex with men.

Ms. Cooke's assertion that the statue is sexist because of the proportions doesn't really hold water. How is creating a statue with idealised proportions sexist? It makes no value statements about a woman's worth as being lower than a man's nor does it suggest any sort of gender stereotype. You may not like the mainstream's view of what idealised beauty is and the unrealistic depiction of a woman's body definitely contributes to poor body image for a lot of girls and women, however it is not sexist.

As to the complains that not showing damage on the breasts makes it worse, they could have shown tears on the bathing suit to show exposed breasts which would have been way worse, and had they showed a chunk out of the breasts tissue, as dumb as it is, I'm sure that would have violated some indecency law about showing "exposed" breasts.

The statue is a dumb juvenile object but on it's own, it is not sexist, it is not chauvinistic, it does not promote violence against women. It should not be banned, it'll flop on it's own. I take no issue with articles like this showing up on Giantbomb, but really the most sexist things about this whole thing was Patrick saying that the torso crossed a line because it was a woman (implying there is a difference between the genders when it comes down to the appropriateness of dismembered torsos) and then only getting the opinions of women in the industry. Stuff like this affects men as well as women. I would however like to get opinions from people in the games industry proper, rather than from games writers who will tend to lean towards the more sensationalistic responses and who will cover these subjects on their own sites anyway.

Posted by MURDERSMASH

@TrevorCCW said:

As gamers, we should be offended that this type of marketing is what elements of the industry think we respond to.

As men, we should be offended that expectations of us are so low that we are supposed to be titillated by a fraction of a woman and the aftermath of violence.

As human beings, we should be having these conversations about what these labels and expectations and depictions are saying about our culture.

As privileged Westerners, we need to be sensitive that it's worse elsewhere, but also of the fact that our own mothers and sisters and girlfriends and daughters and wives are still being marginalized.

Conclusion: fuck you little pricks, seriously. Klepek reached out to informed industry professionals who you've infantilized and dismissed without addressing their arguments. Also go read some books about this shit and see how quickly your opinion changes.

We have a winner. Thank you.

Posted by Akyho

@Krullban: Answere. The mods deleted all the truley horrible comments. I know they did since the first 4 pages quickly filled with

abuse towards Patrick and Women. A good number was very harsh. The mods have cleaned up those posts. Deleting them and suspending or banning accounts.

The level of discussion is the highest you will get with mods. Without mods its a hell hole.

Posted by FancySoapsMan

@BawlZINmotion: it's funny, I remember I was kind of perplexed as to why SR3 didn't generate any controversy regarding its treatment of women when it was still new.

That year there was a thread full of people who were mad that Bioware decided to put femshep as the reverse cover of Mass Effect 3, but apparently nobody thought it was important to discuss the fact that there is a mission in SR3 where you can kidnap a bunch of prostitutes and make them work for your orgnanization.

lolpeoplelol

Edited by Krullban

So far I've gone through a little bit of this topic, and here's the stats I've got written down so far.

194 posts that are in no possible way sexist, and state in a perfectly respectable manner as to how they think this statue is not sexist.

14 posts that could actually legitimately considered to be coming from sexists.

97 posts that are in no possible way offensive, and state in a perfectly respectable manner as to how they think this statue is sexist.

397 posts saying nothing but "everybody who doesn't look at this and automatically think this is sexist is a misogynistic asshole who deserves to die, and is the most sexist "boy" pig on the planet." and how everybody posting is the scum of the earth, and rather than respectably stating their opinion on the matter, just bash and insult everybody in the topic.

There's something off here. I must investigate.

Posted by LiquidS

@DiGiTaL_SiN said:

Leigh Alexander is Anonymous.

We are all Anonymous. Sex bad, Violence Ok.

Posted by DiGiTaL_SiN

Leigh Alexander is Anonymous.

Edited by hinderk

After reading some of the comments in this thread, I think I'm officially going to lump people who are complaining about "feminist propaganda" with people who complain about the "homosexual agenda".

Posted by BawlZINmotion

@Missacre said:

@BawlZINmotion said:

I'm a guy so I apparently don't know any better, but Saints' Row 3 is a lot more offensive to women than this. However I'm not offended, in either case. Life is too short and I have too many other things of concern to worry about a piece of crappy plastic likely made in China.

Now I got two groups pissed at me, yes!

Not even, dude. I agree with you on this. Also, SR3 wasn't offensive, at least not to me. It was lots of fun. People just need to stop worrying about everything. I swear, they see a naked tit and they scream SEXIST PIGS. It does make me sad.

Oh I don't think SR3 is offensive, not in the least. I think with my head.... oh forget it, no one else would understand. I'm just comparing it to the distaste expressed for the "bust" featured in this article. The level SR3 goes to is far beyond this, but I don't recall the same level of "opinion" leveled when it released.

Posted by Missacre

@BawlZINmotion said:

I'm a guy so I apparently don't know any better, but Saints' Row 3 is a lot more offensive to women than this. However I'm not offended, in either case. Life is too short and I have too many other things of concern to worry about a piece of crappy plastic likely made in China.

Now I got two groups pissed at me, yes!

Not even, dude. I agree with you on this. Also, SR3 wasn't offensive, at least not to me. It was lots of fun. People just need to stop worrying about everything. I swear, they see a naked tit and they scream SEXIST PIGS. It does make me sad.

Posted by BawlZINmotion

I'm a guy so I apparently don't know any better, but Saints' Row 3 is a lot more offensive to women than this. However I'm not offended, in either case. Life is too short and I have too many other things of concern to worry about a piece of crappy plastic likely made in China.

Now I got two groups pissed at me, yes!

Posted by Ravenlight

Okay, I've been away from the internet for a solid twelve hours. Have we figured out a solution to this thing yet?

Posted by Missacre

@Captainlunchbox said:

I feel like I'm the only one not surprised that something like this would come from the creators of Dead Island. Just a couple years back, they gave us a surprisingly emotional look at their game, only to give us an end product that was completely misrepresented. So here they are again, apparently... attempting to get that necrophiliac dollar. I don't think it was purposefully misogynistic, just really, really fucking stupid-and yet another round of ammo against people who play videogames as a hobby. That last part is something that I think Patrick attempts to point out, not in a sort of "THIS SHIT MAKES US ALL LOOK BAD" kind of way but rather "Don't be this" example.

Does it get too much attention from him? Who is really to say? I'm a paying member, and I, for one, am glad to see some conscientious pieces done every now and again. The people who complain about it are probably just really fucking uncomfortable or ashamed. Whatever. Find another site.

You see, the thing is, I'm not uncomfortable of ashamed. I'm actually pissed off at the white knight brigade coming to bring down the patriarchy in favor of a feminist-run world. Also, I think I'll stay here. I happen to like this site, and my view of things is as valid as yours.

Posted by NMC2008

@TrevorCCW said:

As gamers, we should be offended that this type of marketing is what elements of the industry think we respond to.

As men, we should be offended that expectations of us are so low that we are supposed to be titillated by a fraction of a woman and the aftermath of violence.

As human beings, we should be having these conversations about what these labels and expectations and depictions are saying about our culture.

As privileged Westerners, we need to be sensitive that it's worse elsewhere, but also of the fact that our own mothers and sisters and girlfriends and daughters and wives are still being marginalized.

Conclusion: fuck you little pricks, seriously. Klepek reached out to informed industry professionals who you've infantilized and dismissed without addressing their arguments. Also go read some books about this shit and see how quickly your opinion changes.

My reaction to this post, i'm sorry but I disagree completely. I will take my leave from this thread as it is too much for me.

Posted by Captainlunchbox

I feel like I'm the only one not surprised that something like this would come from the creators of Dead Island. Just a couple years back, they gave us a surprisingly emotional look at their game, only to give us an end product that was completely misrepresented. So here they are again, apparently... attempting to get that necrophiliac dollar. I don't think it was purposefully misogynistic, just really, really fucking stupid-and yet another round of ammo against people who play videogames as a hobby. That last part is something that I think Patrick attempts to point out, not in a sort of "THIS SHIT MAKES US ALL LOOK BAD" kind of way but rather "Don't be this" example.

Does it get too much attention from him? Who is really to say? I'm a paying member, and I, for one, am glad to see some conscientious pieces done every now and again. The people who complain about it are probably just really fucking uncomfortable or ashamed. Whatever. Find another site.