One thing that puzzles me about the fierce response feminism often receives, particularly in gaming circles, is that I'm not even sure what the naysayers believe is at stake. Do they think that if the overall outlook and make-up of the gaming industry was more gender-neutral, games would have less to offer them? Does that much enjoyment really hinge on excluding women? I highly doubt that it actually does, and even if it did, it wouldn't be hard to find a less inflammatory alternative. Besides, it's not like anything would be eradicated, anyway; it'd all just exist in a more rounded and balanced environment.
@RagingDaemon said:
If you're railing against women being legitimately discriminated against via hiring practices, pay discrepancies, promotion denials, etc, you have a legitimate issue.
If you're fighting for women to feel perfectly comfortable at all times, you don't have a legitimate issue. Real life is rough and messy. Conflicts happen. Social faux pas' are made. Feelings are hurt. Misunderstandings happen.
Just because unfortunate things are inevitable, it doesn't mean we have to submit to them entirely. Take, for example, car crashes. Car crashes are undesirable, but car crashes will happen. You could theoretically completely eradicate them by banning cars outright, but that's unrealistic and nobody wants that. However, sensible people take reasonable measures to avoid accidents, and further measures to mitigate the damage done if one does occur. Likewise, people will inevitably sometimes be hurt or made uncomfortable by things other people say or do, but reasonable people make an effort to avoid causing such discomfort or hurt to others. To stomp around with complete disregard for others' feelings strikes me as childish to the extreme. I don't imagine you're like that at all, but your argument seems to allow for that.
@RagingDaemon said:
Being mistaken for a secretary, being hit on, being told you don't look like you're a programmer or whatever, are bullshit victim hysterical complaints. The world is not obligated to be sensitive and perfectly attuned to your personal set of hangups, no matter who you are.
Why does everything have to be about obligation? Can't we just want to treat each other civilly, professionally, and with consideration? You dismiss those complaints as "personal hang-ups" as though these are highly specific idiosyncrasies that it would take some herculean effort to keep track of, but they're all easily common enough for us all to be aware of and attempt to avoid. It mainly comes down to not making assumptions based on how somebody looks.
@RagingDaemon said:
Are you going to advocate for litigating "niceness"?
This seems to be a common thread among people arguing against feminism (and related issues). It is, as far as I can tell, a straw man. At what point was anyone asking for anything to be codified in law? There are plenty of things one is legally entitled to do that would render one a complete prick. That doesn't mean that there isn't a discussion to be had about whether it's a good idea to do those things, and how those things affect others, and whether we want care at all about those consequences.
@RagingDaemon said:
Will you be happy once all language is fully neutral, the only allowed words denoting negative things are strictly regulated, and offenders fined and punished? How would you regulate interactions to prevent anyone from being offended ever?
I think people are more concerned with institutional exclusion than the potential for anyone to ever be offended. If any of these things were happening in isolation, it might be a different matter, but when it's all symptomatic of an ubiquitous atmosphere of exclusion and objectification, it seems like a pretty serious matter to me. At some point it's evidence of unhealthy attitudes towards women. It's not fair on women, and I don't think it's good for men, either.
@RagingDaemon said:
There is nothing wrong with selling to your audience.
Neither is there anything wrong with broadening it.
@RagingDaemon said:
Please start arguing that heterosexual Romance novels have unrealistic depictions of men. Please rally hard for that to be fixed.
That's not at all a fair comparison. A better analogy would be comparing video gaming to book-writing in totality. Books are written on pretty much every subject under the sun, and from nearly as many perspectives, with pretty much everyone well-represented. Sure, there are still significant biases, but it's broad and deep enough that nobody need be left feeling excluded from reading, unless it's the act of reading itself putting them off. If books were like games are now, it'd be almost all war stories, crime novels, science fiction and fantasy adventure, and sports almanacs; all written by men and with male readers (or readers with traditionally male interests and attitudes) in mind. This might serve most of the people on this site well, but I sincerely hope that we can all agree that the world of books is in no way diminished by also including a whole wealth of other works for other interests, lifestyles and backgrounds.
If gaming were to transcend its narrow focus, it could become a much more transparent and integrated facet of society, much like books, films and music are now (to varying extents).
Unless, that is, you want gaming to consist entirely of the equivalent of trashy romance novels. I think that would be rather limiting.
@RagingDaemon said:
Also, while you're fighting the good fight for women to get into STEM fields by any and all means necessary... Know some other fields women are underrepresented in? Garbage collectors, loggers, truck drivers, construction workers. You know, the most dangerous, destructive, and shit paying jobs. There is absolutely no parity there. But something tells me you aren't going to give a shit.
I'm not sure what this proves. If women want those jobs, and have demonstrated an aptitude, I think they should get them. If your implication is that no-one really wants these jobs, there are other undesirable jobs in which women are overrepresented. Ideally, everyone would be happy in their work, but failing that, I'd rather there be little disparity at either end of the spectrum.
Log in to comment