ism

[quarrel]

Sexism and racism - or, at least, their elements - are prevalent everywhere, even in places that aren’t immediately obvious.

Pac-Man was designed around an eating theme (and given colorful, non-threatening graphics) because the designer was trying to appeal to female players, who were an untapped market at the time. He couldn’t come up with a good

Comments

[terrycloth]

I think if art makes you feel bad when you see it, then the fix is for you not to keep looking at it, and maybe for you to tell people that you don't like it.

It's silly to think that the artist is a bad person for making something you don't like... and really, if you're bothered by things like 'this game uses the standard social convention that a generic person is a man' then you're probably bothered by waaaaay too much stuff. The giant boob lady is something more reasonable to be offended by I'd think but still -- sheesh.

Also, the word 'objectifying' should be banned because the whole concept is stupid.

[aprivatefox]

But... if nobody's allowed to be bothered by something, then how do we ever get better?

Wouldn't it be cool to live in a world where sometimes a random character's a woman and it's not A Statement About Women? When a random character is a man, it's not A Statement About Men, after all.

Telling the artist that something had offensive elements is a way of pointing at things that could be better; the artist isn't a bad person, but the art may have done something he (or she, but I'll guess he, here) didn't intend. And that's cool; that's okay. The artist lives in the culture; we can't expect the artist to see everything the culture does poorly at once. But we can poke the artist about it, and say "maybe you're saying something extra here. Maybe you don't mean to be saying it?"

And sometimes the creator didn't see it, and can improve it. And the art gets a little stronger, and the story's a little less about reinforcing things in our society we don't like

[quarrel]

It's silly to think that the artist is a bad person for making something you don't like...

Is there a difference between “I don’t like it” and “I think it’s harmful”? I don’t know.

Is there a difference between “this work has flaws” and “this work is worthless and its creator is a bad person”? I believe so. http://www.socialjusticeleague.net/2011/09/how-to-be-a-fan-of-problematic-things/

and really, if you're bothered by things like 'this game uses the standard social convention that a generic person is a man' then you're probably bothered by waaaaay too much stuff.

I am bothered by it, because I know it affects me. My subconscious reaction to the large white mentor in Journey’s cutscenes:

[rowyn]

I don't really know where I fall here. I am not actually offended by the stupid oversexed female characters in Dragon's Crown or the "men are people and women are only women" convention.

But I am, really, rather tired of it. Especially of that being the vast majority of what's out there. But the answer to bad art is more art. I don't think it's pointless to criticize artists for falling into the same bad habits that industries have been encouraging for decades or centuries. Haranguing them is pointless, maybe. Noting it isn't. Pointing things out is how we learn.

... eventually. One hopes.

[quarrel]

Haranguing them is pointless, yes. The least effective way at changing someone's behavior is saying, "You're doing something wrong."

[rowyn]

Oh heck yes. I am not sure what's up with the confrontational attitude our culture breeds around every disagreement. It doesn't seem very effective at all. I guess it's for alienating 'their group' and bonding with 'our group' and the point isn't to persuade anyone at all?

[quarrel]

Thank you for that input. It's something I hadn't considered, and it puts a new twist on a lot of things.

[shaterri]

Portal 2 (and I think it is only the second - in the first game the relationship between GlaDOS and Chell was much less personal, for want of a better word) is an interesting case for me; you're definitely right that the language is objectifying, but the impression I get is that's a deliberate choice on the part of the designers; it shows us the absurdity of GlaDOS's personality in how she tries to get in the most awkward jabs she can at Chell. It's writers using ugly language to show us a character's biases, and overall I think it does a pretty nifty job of that. There's always a line you have to be careful of when you try to pull that sort of thing off, of course - the way you handle it can say as much about the writer's attitudes as it does about a character's - but I think it can be done in a way that does more to call out the biases and show their absurdity than to reinforce them, and I'd say that's what Portal 2 achieves.