I'm just curious...do actual WOMEN ever post topics about how women are over-sexualized, objectified, etc. in games, or is it only "concerned men" that post these topics? These topics are a fairly common phenomenon here, and it seems like they are always posted by men.
I dunno, I get the impression that this stuff bothers men more than it actually bothers the women. I honestly think that many women probably enjoy looking pretty/sexy in a game. I mean, go walk through a mall and look at the pictures of models they put up in clothing stores...do those models look prudish and realistic? No! They are sexualized, just like everything else.
I'm sure there are exceptions to the rule, but I really think that in our society most people, not just women, want to be sexy.
You know, one of the things that interests me in this thread is how many posters are equating sexualization with objectification.
Let's just say you are right. let's say that all the female models in GW2 are 38-12-38 barbie dolls wearing high heels, dental floss, and a few strips of gauze. Let's EVEN say I as a male look at them and find them appealing, even arousing.
So?
Does that mean I'm going to expect women in real life to look like that? No. My girlfriend looks nothing like that, and I think she's gorgeous. And I'd never want her to be like that. Does it mean that I automatically consider all women as being nothing more than a series of conveniently connected orifices for my use, that can even make sandwiches? Nope. I can sometimes see the media's complaint that children are impressionable and might get the wrong idea, but I'm an adult and I am smart enough to know better.
And even IF making bad impressions on kids was the problem here, and even IF little kids were playing this game...that's the parent's job to teach them proper behaviour. Don't blame the game. Blame the upbringing. My parents taught me to reat women with respect. Then I grew up and realized you trat them like everyone else. Because they ARE everyone else. End Of Story.
I'm just curious...do actual WOMEN ever post topics about how women are over-sexualized, objectified, etc. in games, or is it only "concerned men" that post these topics? These topics are a fairly common phenomenon here, and it seems like they are always posted by men.
I dunno, I get the impression that this stuff bothers men more than it actually bothers the women. I honestly think that many women probably enjoy looking pretty/sexy in a game. I mean, go walk through a mall and look at the pictures of models they put up in clothing stores...do those models look prudish and realistic? No! They are sexualized, just like everything else.
I'm sure there are exceptions to the rule, but I really think that in our society most people, not just women, want to be sexy.
Sexy in the bedroom and at home for my spouse, sure. There is time and place for everything and I believe that far from everyone thinks that it is okay all the time and everywhere.
Well when you think about it why would people find a virtual computerized pixel sexual anyway ? I think some fo you need some serious help.
I think you need help for being in serious denial.
Men have been aroused by cave paintings ffs.
Yeah everyone is the same as you. You solved everyone elses issue.
Yeah, every man sees any kind of female figure for what it is... there are just people like you, who seem to guilt-trip themselves over it every time they fall in line. It's not that you don't see it - you just "don't want to", or rather "wish you didn't" - and would never admit to even having the slightest moment of such.
Which I find deadly strange. Like, you're so macho that you're libido is untouchable unless you want it to be - which is bullshit.
~and you're not the only one. I find it very common in American males that are still scared of their penis.
You have a very narrow and shallow definition about men.
You have a very narrow and shallow definition about men.
I wonder what your definition for women is?
All people are the same at the core, they just chose to react differently because they a) don't want to be viewed outwardly in a certain light, or b) are a product of their environment to naturally react that way.
If I showed you a picture of Jessica Rabbit, your first instinct would be to recognize it as some kind of 'idealized' female form, regardless of it's nature as a cartoon. It's *you* who chooses to react by refusing to be turned on by it, or just letting yourself be comfortable with your sexual nature.
You really have to try hard to deny your very nature, and it doesn't make you a better person for trying - it just makes you conflicted.
Women are no different.
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4 Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
You have a very narrow and shallow definition about men.
I wonder what your definition for women is?
All people are the same at the core, they just chose to react differently because they a) don't want to be viewed outwardly in a certain light, or b) are a product of their environment to naturally react that way.
If I showed you a picture of Jessica Rabbit, your first instinct would be to recognize it as some kind of 'idealized' female form, regardless of it's nature as a cartoon. It's *you* who chooses to react by refusing to be turned on by it, or just letting yourself be comfortable with your sexual nature.
You really have to try hard to deny your very nature, and it doesn't make you a better person for trying - it just makes you conflicted.
Women are no different.
If having discipline is considered to be a positive virtue, then prohibiting yourself from getting turned on at the wrong place, is a display of a positive virtue. One can consider a more disciplined person to be "better" than an identical person with less discipline.
I'm just curious...do actual WOMEN ever post topics about how women are over-sexualized, objectified, etc. in games, or is it only "concerned men" that post these topics? These topics are a fairly common phenomenon here, and it seems like they are always posted by men.
I dunno, I get the impression that this stuff bothers men more than it actually bothers the women. I honestly think that many women probably enjoy looking pretty/sexy in a game. I mean, go walk through a mall and look at the pictures of models they put up in clothing stores...do those models look prudish and realistic? No! They are sexualized, just like everything else.
I'm sure there are exceptions to the rule, but I really think that in our society most people, not just women, want to be sexy.
Sexy in the bedroom and at home for my spouse, sure. There is time and place for everything and I believe that far from everyone thinks that it is okay all the time and everywhere.
I would be 100% in favor of giving players the option to have on a sexy outfit or a more conservative outfit, and some games do this. A lot of times though, a game dev simply doesn't have the resources to make sexy and conservative options for everything in the game, so they choose one direction or another.
And really, at the end of the day, I'm 99% sure that the majority of people prefer the sexy option, and the game dev is trying to sell copies so the choice is obvious .
That said, I do think they can take the sexy option too far (TERA). I want my characters to be attractive, but I don't want them to wear thread lol.
You know, one of the things that interests me in this thread is how many posters are equating sexualization with objectification.
Let's just say you are right. let's say that all the female models in GW2 are 38-12-38 barbie dolls wearing high heels, dental floss, and a few strips of gauze. Let's EVEN say I as a male look at them and find them appealing, even arousing.
So?
Does that mean I'm going to expect women in real life to look like that? No. My girlfriend looks nothing like that, and I think she's gorgeous. And I'd never want her to be like that. Does it mean that I automatically consider all women as being nothing more than a series of conveniently connected orifices for my use, that can even make sandwiches? Nope. I can sometimes see the media's complaint that children are impressionable and might get the wrong idea, but I'm an adult and I am smart enough to know better.
And even IF making bad impressions on kids was the problem here, and even IF little kids were playing this game...that's the parent's job to teach them proper behaviour. Don't blame the game. Blame the upbringing. My parents taught me to reat women with respect. Then I grew up and realized you trat them like everyone else. Because they ARE everyone else. End Of Story.
This, it's not because media give you message X that everyone takes it over automatically and accepts it as truth in real life.
The audience isn't just a passive, robot-like entity that just takes over whatever is fired at it. That view, called the Magic Bullet Theory, has been discarded decades ago.
But it's still popular to speak of, just because of the drama potential
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
You have a very narrow and shallow definition about men.
I wonder what your definition for women is?
All people are the same at the core, they just chose to react differently because they a) don't want to be viewed outwardly in a certain light, or b) are a product of their environment to naturally react that way.
If I showed you a picture of Jessica Rabbit, your first instinct would be to recognize it as some kind of 'idealized' female form, regardless of it's nature as a cartoon. It's *you* who chooses to react by refusing to be turned on by it, or just letting yourself be comfortable with your sexual nature.
You really have to try hard to deny your very nature, and it doesn't make you a better person for trying - it just makes you conflicted.
Women are no different.
If having discipline is considered to be a positive virtue, then prohibiting yourself from getting turned on at the wrong place, is a display of a positive virtue. One can consider a more disciplined person to be "better" than an identical person with less discipline.
True, but where is the 'virtue' in said discipline if you browbeat people for being comfortable enough with their sexuality to allow themselves to be turned on by a Jessica Rabbit.
~and if anything, I don't consider that kind of discipline as an asset that makes one person 'better' than another, because I could argue that the simple fact that they tend to disgust themselves makes the other camp 'better' for being comfortable in their own psyche.
There really is no excuse for trying to put yourself on a pedestal over it either.
~I used to feel guilty about checking out the females while at church, but without outwardly doing something with it, what crime am I really committing besides punishing myself over nothing?
You're allowed to look, and thusly consider the possibilities, regardless of the circumstances. Acting on it is different, and usually the first action is counter-intuitive, like bringing up "hey, don't flash your tits around" which just sets off the flag that you were looking in the first place and making a preemptive strike so you don't look a fool - though you *just* did by opening your fool mouth.
That last part is a parable for this entire thread.
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4 Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
You have a very narrow and shallow definition about men.
I wonder what your definition for women is?
All people are the same at the core, they just chose to react differently because they a) don't want to be viewed outwardly in a certain light, or b) are a product of their environment to naturally react that way.
If I showed you a picture of Jessica Rabbit, your first instinct would be to recognize it as some kind of 'idealized' female form, regardless of it's nature as a cartoon. It's *you* who chooses to react by refusing to be turned on by it, or just letting yourself be comfortable with your sexual nature.
You really have to try hard to deny your very nature, and it doesn't make you a better person for trying - it just makes you conflicted.
Women are no different.
If having discipline is considered to be a positive virtue, then prohibiting yourself from getting turned on at the wrong place, is a display of a positive virtue. One can consider a more disciplined person to be "better" than an identical person with less discipline.
True, but where is the 'virtue' in said discipline if you browbeat people for being comfortable enough with their sexuality to allow themselves to be turned on by a Jessica Rabbit.
~and if anything, I don't consider that kind of discipline as an asset that makes one person 'better' than another, because I could argue that the simple fact that they tend to disgust themselves makes the other camp 'better' for being comfortable in their own psyche.
There really is no excuse for trying to put yourself on a pedestal over it either.
~I used to feel guilty about checking out the females while at church, but without outwardly doing something with it, what crime am I really committing besides punishing myself over nothing?
You're allowed to look, and thusly consider the possibilities, regardless of the circumstances. Acting on it is different, and usually the first action is counter-intuitive, like bringing up "hey, don't flash your tits around" which just sets off the flag that you were looking in the first place and making a preemptive strike so you don't look a fool - though you *just* did by opening your fool mouth.
+1
I never get why people try to deny that humans are sexual creatures, or that, that is somehow "bad." I mean, just go to the store and look at a popular magazine (esp. Cosmo)...they are almost all filled with sexual images. And really, you don't even have to do that, just go to a social gathering place like a mall and look around...you will see plenty of sexualized images.
It's just who we are. If people weren't attracted to images like Jessica Rabbit, then they wouldn't be so prominent in our society...and yet they are extremely prominent.
You have a very narrow and shallow definition about men.
I wonder what your definition for women is?
All people are the same at the core, they just chose to react differently because they a) don't want to be viewed outwardly in a certain light, or b) are a product of their environment to naturally react that way.
If I showed you a picture of Jessica Rabbit, your first instinct would be to recognize it as some kind of 'idealized' female form, regardless of it's nature as a cartoon. It's *you* who chooses to react by refusing to be turned on by it, or just letting yourself be comfortable with your sexual nature.
You really have to try hard to deny your very nature, and it doesn't make you a better person for trying - it just makes you conflicted.
Women are no different.
If having discipline is considered to be a positive virtue, then prohibiting yourself from getting turned on at the wrong place, is a display of a positive virtue. One can consider a more disciplined person to be "better" than an identical person with less discipline.
True, but where is the 'virtue' in said discipline if you browbeat people for being comfortable enough with their sexuality to allow themselves to be turned on by a Jessica Rabbit.
~and if anything, I don't consider that kind of discipline as an asset that makes one person 'better' than another, because I could argue that the simple fact that they tend to disgust themselves makes the other camp 'better' for being comfortable in their own psyche.
There really is no excuse for trying to put yourself on a pedestal over it either.
~I used to feel guilty about checking out the females while at church, but without outwardly doing something with it, what crime am I really committing besides punishing myself over nothing?
One negative choice doesn't erase a positive choice and vice versa. If the ideal is to be a tolerant and respectful person, then it is negative to browbeat and/or insult people for whatever reason.
As for the "disgust" aspect: unless you have done a proper psychological evaluation of the persons in question, you can only speculate about what they feel about themselves.
As for "excuses for trying to put yourself on a pedestal": that depends on what the ideal is. For instance, it is not unthinkable that law-abiding citizens put themselves on a pedestal over people who commit crimes for a living. There is, of course, a difference between setting yourself on a pedestal and telling people that you are setting yourself on a pedestal for this and that reason.
As for your church example: it depends on what your ideals are including your religious beliefs.
You have a very narrow and shallow definition about men.
I wonder what your definition for women is?
All people are the same at the core, they just chose to react differently because they a) don't want to be viewed outwardly in a certain light, or b) are a product of their environment to naturally react that way.
If I showed you a picture of Jessica Rabbit, your first instinct would be to recognize it as some kind of 'idealized' female form, regardless of it's nature as a cartoon. It's *you* who chooses to react by refusing to be turned on by it, or just letting yourself be comfortable with your sexual nature.
You really have to try hard to deny your very nature, and it doesn't make you a better person for trying - it just makes you conflicted.
Women are no different.
If having discipline is considered to be a positive virtue, then prohibiting yourself from getting turned on at the wrong place, is a display of a positive virtue. One can consider a more disciplined person to be "better" than an identical person with less discipline.
True, but where is the 'virtue' in said discipline if you browbeat people for being comfortable enough with their sexuality to allow themselves to be turned on by a Jessica Rabbit.
~and if anything, I don't consider that kind of discipline as an asset that makes one person 'better' than another, because I could argue that the simple fact that they tend to disgust themselves makes the other camp 'better' for being comfortable in their own psyche.
There really is no excuse for trying to put yourself on a pedestal over it either.
~I used to feel guilty about checking out the females while at church, but without outwardly doing something with it, what crime am I really committing besides punishing myself over nothing?
You're allowed to look, and thusly consider the possibilities, regardless of the circumstances. Acting on it is different, and usually the first action is counter-intuitive, like bringing up "hey, don't flash your tits around" which just sets off the flag that you were looking in the first place and making a preemptive strike so you don't look a fool - though you *just* did by opening your fool mouth.
+1
I never get why people try to deny that humans are sexual creatures, or that, that is somehow "bad." I mean, just go to the store and look at a popular magazine (esp. Cosmo)...they are almost all filled with sexual images. And really, you don't even have to do that, just go to a social gathering place like a mall and look around...you will see plenty of sexualized images.
It's just who we are. If people weren't attracted to images like Jessica Rabbit, then they wouldn't be so prominent in our society...and yet they are extremely prominent.
There is difference between being biologically attracted to something and letting yourself getting turned on by it. Getting turned on, is not an instantaneous process.
apply same question to any other game forum on this website and you will get a result with more 'yes' than this poll.
silly poll is silly.
If you continue to make sweeping statements like you know what everyone everywhere thinks about a certain topic then I am going to shout at you. It easy to type 'I think this is the worst game ever' Rather than the 'This is the worst game ever'
You have a very narrow and shallow definition about men.
I wonder what your definition for women is?
All people are the same at the core, they just chose to react differently because they a) don't want to be viewed outwardly in a certain light, or b) are a product of their environment to naturally react that way.
If I showed you a picture of Jessica Rabbit, your first instinct would be to recognize it as some kind of 'idealized' female form, regardless of it's nature as a cartoon. It's *you* who chooses to react by refusing to be turned on by it, or just letting yourself be comfortable with your sexual nature.
You really have to try hard to deny your very nature, and it doesn't make you a better person for trying - it just makes you conflicted.
Women are no different.
If having discipline is considered to be a positive virtue, then prohibiting yourself from getting turned on at the wrong place, is a display of a positive virtue. One can consider a more disciplined person to be "better" than an identical person with less discipline.
True, but where is the 'virtue' in said discipline if you browbeat people for being comfortable enough with their sexuality to allow themselves to be turned on by a Jessica Rabbit.
~and if anything, I don't consider that kind of discipline as an asset that makes one person 'better' than another, because I could argue that the simple fact that they tend to disgust themselves makes the other camp 'better' for being comfortable in their own psyche.
There really is no excuse for trying to put yourself on a pedestal over it either.
~I used to feel guilty about checking out the females while at church, but without outwardly doing something with it, what crime am I really committing besides punishing myself over nothing?
You're allowed to look, and thusly consider the possibilities, regardless of the circumstances. Acting on it is different, and usually the first action is counter-intuitive, like bringing up "hey, don't flash your tits around" which just sets off the flag that you were looking in the first place and making a preemptive strike so you don't look a fool - though you *just* did by opening your fool mouth.
+1
I never get why people try to deny that humans are sexual creatures, or that, that is somehow "bad." I mean, just go to the store and look at a popular magazine (esp. Cosmo)...they are almost all filled with sexual images. And really, you don't even have to do that, just go to a social gathering place like a mall and look around...you will see plenty of sexualized images.
It's just who we are. If people weren't attracted to images like Jessica Rabbit, then they wouldn't be so prominent in our society...and yet they are extremely prominent.
There is difference between being biologically attracted to something and letting yourself getting turned on by it. Getting turned on, is not an instantaneous process.
I think you are playing the semantics game here, but if by turned on you mean...physically...turned on, then no I am not 14, I do not get physically turned on by everything and sometimes nothing lol .
I was just using "turned on" to basically mean attracted to.
One negative choice doesn't erase a positive choice and vice versa. If the ideal is to be a tolerant and respectful person, then it is negative to browbeat and/or insult people for whatever reason.
As for the "disgust" aspect: unless you have done a proper psychological evaluation of the persons in question, you can only speculate about what they feel about themselves.
How else does one "train" themself to deny their sexual nature if not through guilt and/or disgust?
As for "excuses for trying to put yourself on a pedestal": that depends on what the ideal is. For instance, it is not unthinkable that law-abiding citizens put themselves on a pedestal over people who commit crimes for a living. There is, of course, a difference between setting yourself on a pedestal and telling people that you are setting yourself on a pedestal for this and that reason.
The day that staring at tits becomes a criminal act is the day you can use that argument... and you don't have to actually say "I'm on a pedestal" to use passive-aggressive wording to get the same point out. Anytime someone denigrates another they are just pointing themselves out as superior. ~and you're no better than anyone else because you think you have willpower over your sexual nature, others are quite comfortable with theirs.
As for your church example: it depends on what your ideals are including your religious beliefs.
Again, that means you are either punishing yourself, or taking shit from some guy that thinks he is better than you for whatever reason. None of it matters.
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4 Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
There is difference between being biologically attracted to something and letting yourself getting turned on by it. Getting turned on, is not an instantaneous process.
I think you are playing the semantics game here, but if by turned on you mean...physically...turned on, then no I am not 14, I do not get physically turned on by everything and sometimes nothing lol .
I was just using "turned on" to basically mean attracted to.
I was refering to "turned on" as in " feeling great sexual desire; "feeling horny""
You have a very narrow and shallow definition about men.
I wonder what your definition for women is?
All people are the same at the core, they just chose to react differently because they a) don't want to be viewed outwardly in a certain light, or b) are a product of their environment to naturally react that way.
If I showed you a picture of Jessica Rabbit, your first instinct would be to recognize it as some kind of 'idealized' female form, regardless of it's nature as a cartoon. It's *you* who chooses to react by refusing to be turned on by it, or just letting yourself be comfortable with your sexual nature.
You really have to try hard to deny your very nature, and it doesn't make you a better person for trying - it just makes you conflicted.
Women are no different.
If having discipline is considered to be a positive virtue, then prohibiting yourself from getting turned on at the wrong place, is a display of a positive virtue. One can consider a more disciplined person to be "better" than an identical person with less discipline.
True, but where is the 'virtue' in said discipline if you browbeat people for being comfortable enough with their sexuality to allow themselves to be turned on by a Jessica Rabbit.
~and if anything, I don't consider that kind of discipline as an asset that makes one person 'better' than another, because I could argue that the simple fact that they tend to disgust themselves makes the other camp 'better' for being comfortable in their own psyche.
There really is no excuse for trying to put yourself on a pedestal over it either.
~I used to feel guilty about checking out the females while at church, but without outwardly doing something with it, what crime am I really committing besides punishing myself over nothing?
You're allowed to look, and thusly consider the possibilities, regardless of the circumstances. Acting on it is different, and usually the first action is counter-intuitive, like bringing up "hey, don't flash your tits around" which just sets off the flag that you were looking in the first place and making a preemptive strike so you don't look a fool - though you *just* did by opening your fool mouth.
+1
I never get why people try to deny that humans are sexual creatures, or that, that is somehow "bad." I mean, just go to the store and look at a popular magazine (esp. Cosmo)...they are almost all filled with sexual images. And really, you don't even have to do that, just go to a social gathering place like a mall and look around...you will see plenty of sexualized images.
It's just who we are. If people weren't attracted to images like Jessica Rabbit, then they wouldn't be so prominent in our society...and yet they are extremely prominent.
There is difference between being biologically attracted to something and letting yourself getting turned on by it. Getting turned on, is not an instantaneous process.
I think you are playing the semantics game here, but if by turned on you mean...physically...turned on, then no I am not 14, I do not get physically turned on by everything and sometimes nothing lol .
I was just using "turned on" to basically mean attracted to.
I was refering to "turned on" as in " feeling great sexual desire; "feeling horny""
One negative choice doesn't erase a positive choice and vice versa. If the ideal is to be a tolerant and respectful person, then it is negative to browbeat and/or insult people for whatever reason.
As for the "disgust" aspect: unless you have done a proper psychological evaluation of the persons in question, you can only speculate about what they feel about themselves.
How else does one "train" themself to deny their sexual nature if not through guilt and/or disgust?
As for "excuses for trying to put yourself on a pedestal": that depends on what the ideal is. For instance, it is not unthinkable that law-abiding citizens put themselves on a pedestal over people who commit crimes for a living. There is, of course, a difference between setting yourself on a pedestal and telling people that you are setting yourself on a pedestal for this and that reason.
The day that staring at tits becomes a criminal act is the day you can use that argument... and you don't have to actually say "I'm on a pedestal" to use passive-aggressive wording to get the same point out. Anytime someone denigrates another they are just pointing themselves out as superior. ~and you're no better than anyone else because you think you have willpower over your sexual nature, others are quite comfortable with theirs.
As for your church example: it depends on what your ideals are including your religious beliefs.
Again, that means you are either punishing yourself, or taking shit from some guy that thinks he is better than you for whatever reason. None of it matters.
To answer your first question: do you believe that all brothers and fathers to well-developed beautiful females have "trained" themselves to deny their sexual nature towards the female in question through guilt and disgust? Could it not be that when they see those females, they have other things in their mind that they connect to them? Things and feelings that shaped from raising/growing up with a person?
Why don't you go to such fathesr and ask them: "How often do you feel horny when interacting with your daughter and if you don't, did you train it away through guilt and disgust?"
In general, with females who have no close relation to you, you can simply focus your mind on something else, like what you were doing. When talking to them, you look them in the eyes and focus on the conversation (well that is the custom when having a conversation with any person really). It takes time to get sexually aroused and it is therefore a choice to let yourself be in a position where you get aroused and horny.
As for your second paragraph: I assumed that you made a general statement about "putting yourself on a pedestal" and therefore I replied with a general statement about it as well. Furthermore, when someone argues, they do not necessarely need to believe in the axioms they use to argue. One can assume certain axioms, then argue from that perspective without actually using those axioms normally. To continue, I would like to point out that what one person finds denigrating does not necessarely mean that the other person finds it to be denigrating as well.
As for your final paragraph: whether it matters or not strictly depends on your ideals and beliefs. Maybe the ideals and beliefs of a person in similar situation are such that feeling bad is the correct response and a response that matters.
Then by that definition, no, I do not get "turned on" when I randomly see sexual images in every day social or professional life.
FFFfffuuuu.
Nothing I hate worse than a clear debate devolving into semantics. Why not just throw out an entire argument over use of grammar?
I thought it was clear too, but evidently that may not be the case. Would have chosen a very different approach if it was merely about attraction. Hell, straight males can very well be attracted, but not sexually aroused, by symmetrical shapes among other men.
Then by that definition, no, I do not get "turned on" when I randomly see sexual images in every day social or professional life.
FFFfffuuuu.
Nothing I hate worse than a clear debate devolving into semantics. Why not just throw out an entire argument over use of grammar?
But that's like...every single debate on this site lol .
I bet that TwoThreeFour is picturing you as basically an extreme deviant that always wears a gimp suit under his clothes "just in case," because you said you were "turned on" by images like Jessica Rabbit. And to him, that means "feeling great sexual desire." This is obviously false.
And on the same token, I am betting that you are seeing TwoThreeFour as a holier than thou proselytizer in denial of his very nature because he says you have no control since you get "turned on" by images like Jessica Rabbit. And to you (and me), turned on probably just means that you found something sexually attractive. This is obviously false as well.
Comments
I'm just curious...do actual WOMEN ever post topics about how women are over-sexualized, objectified, etc. in games, or is it only "concerned men" that post these topics? These topics are a fairly common phenomenon here, and it seems like they are always posted by men.
I dunno, I get the impression that this stuff bothers men more than it actually bothers the women. I honestly think that many women probably enjoy looking pretty/sexy in a game. I mean, go walk through a mall and look at the pictures of models they put up in clothing stores...do those models look prudish and realistic? No! They are sexualized, just like everything else.
I'm sure there are exceptions to the rule, but I really think that in our society most people, not just women, want to be sexy.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
You know, one of the things that interests me in this thread is how many posters are equating sexualization with objectification.
Let's just say you are right. let's say that all the female models in GW2 are 38-12-38 barbie dolls wearing high heels, dental floss, and a few strips of gauze. Let's EVEN say I as a male look at them and find them appealing, even arousing.
So?
Does that mean I'm going to expect women in real life to look like that? No. My girlfriend looks nothing like that, and I think she's gorgeous. And I'd never want her to be like that. Does it mean that I automatically consider all women as being nothing more than a series of conveniently connected orifices for my use, that can even make sandwiches? Nope. I can sometimes see the media's complaint that children are impressionable and might get the wrong idea, but I'm an adult and I am smart enough to know better.
And even IF making bad impressions on kids was the problem here, and even IF little kids were playing this game...that's the parent's job to teach them proper behaviour. Don't blame the game. Blame the upbringing. My parents taught me to reat women with respect. Then I grew up and realized you trat them like everyone else. Because they ARE everyone else. End Of Story.
Sexy in the bedroom and at home for my spouse, sure. There is time and place for everything and I believe that far from everyone thinks that it is okay all the time and everywhere.
You have a very narrow and shallow definition about men.
I wonder what your definition for women is?
All people are the same at the core, they just chose to react differently because they a) don't want to be viewed outwardly in a certain light, or b) are a product of their environment to naturally react that way.
If I showed you a picture of Jessica Rabbit, your first instinct would be to recognize it as some kind of 'idealized' female form, regardless of it's nature as a cartoon. It's *you* who chooses to react by refusing to be turned on by it, or just letting yourself be comfortable with your sexual nature.
You really have to try hard to deny your very nature, and it doesn't make you a better person for trying - it just makes you conflicted.
Women are no different.
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4
Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
If having discipline is considered to be a positive virtue, then prohibiting yourself from getting turned on at the wrong place, is a display of a positive virtue. One can consider a more disciplined person to be "better" than an identical person with less discipline.
I would be 100% in favor of giving players the option to have on a sexy outfit or a more conservative outfit, and some games do this. A lot of times though, a game dev simply doesn't have the resources to make sexy and conservative options for everything in the game, so they choose one direction or another.
And really, at the end of the day, I'm 99% sure that the majority of people prefer the sexy option, and the game dev is trying to sell copies so the choice is obvious
.
That said, I do think they can take the sexy option too far (TERA). I want my characters to be attractive, but I don't want them to wear thread lol.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
This, it's not because media give you message X that everyone takes it over automatically and accepts it as truth in real life.
The audience isn't just a passive, robot-like entity that just takes over whatever is fired at it. That view, called the Magic Bullet Theory, has been discarded decades ago.
But it's still popular to speak of, just because of the drama potential
Feel free to use my referral link for SW:TOR if you want to test out the game. You'll get some special unlocks!
True, but where is the 'virtue' in said discipline if you browbeat people for being comfortable enough with their sexuality to allow themselves to be turned on by a Jessica Rabbit.
~and if anything, I don't consider that kind of discipline as an asset that makes one person 'better' than another, because I could argue that the simple fact that they tend to disgust themselves makes the other camp 'better' for being comfortable in their own psyche.
There really is no excuse for trying to put yourself on a pedestal over it either.
~I used to feel guilty about checking out the females while at church, but without outwardly doing something with it, what crime am I really committing besides punishing myself over nothing?
You're allowed to look, and thusly consider the possibilities, regardless of the circumstances. Acting on it is different, and usually the first action is counter-intuitive, like bringing up "hey, don't flash your tits around" which just sets off the flag that you were looking in the first place and making a preemptive strike so you don't look a fool - though you *just* did by opening your fool mouth.
That last part is a parable for this entire thread.
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4
Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
They even have an armor set for people with religious sensitivities. How cool is that?
+1
I never get why people try to deny that humans are sexual creatures, or that, that is somehow "bad." I mean, just go to the store and look at a popular magazine (esp. Cosmo)...they are almost all filled with sexual images. And really, you don't even have to do that, just go to a social gathering place like a mall and look around...you will see plenty of sexualized images.
It's just who we are. If people weren't attracted to images like Jessica Rabbit, then they wouldn't be so prominent in our society...and yet they are extremely prominent.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
The fact that I can be a mass-murdering nun is just so awesome.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Nuns with guns ftw!
One negative choice doesn't erase a positive choice and vice versa. If the ideal is to be a tolerant and respectful person, then it is negative to browbeat and/or insult people for whatever reason.
As for the "disgust" aspect: unless you have done a proper psychological evaluation of the persons in question, you can only speculate about what they feel about themselves.
As for "excuses for trying to put yourself on a pedestal": that depends on what the ideal is. For instance, it is not unthinkable that law-abiding citizens put themselves on a pedestal over people who commit crimes for a living. There is, of course, a difference between setting yourself on a pedestal and telling people that you are setting yourself on a pedestal for this and that reason.
As for your church example: it depends on what your ideals are including your religious beliefs.
There is difference between being biologically attracted to something and letting yourself getting turned on by it. Getting turned on, is not an instantaneous process.
apply same question to any other game forum on this website and you will get a result with more 'yes' than this poll.
silly poll is silly.
If you continue to make sweeping statements like you know what everyone everywhere thinks about a certain topic then I am going to shout at you.
It easy to type 'I think this is the worst game ever'
Rather than the 'This is the worst game ever'
I think you are playing the semantics game here, but if by turned on you mean...physically...turned on, then no I am not 14, I do not get physically turned on by everything and sometimes nothing lol
.
I was just using "turned on" to basically mean attracted to.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4
Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
I was refering to "turned on" as in " feeling great sexual desire; "feeling horny""
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/turned+on
Then by that definition, no, I do not get "turned on" when I randomly see sexual images in every day social or professional life.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
FFFfffuuuu.
Nothing I hate worse than a clear debate devolving into semantics. Why not just throw out an entire argument over use of grammar?
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4
Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
To answer your first question: do you believe that all brothers and fathers to well-developed beautiful females have "trained" themselves to deny their sexual nature towards the female in question through guilt and disgust? Could it not be that when they see those females, they have other things in their mind that they connect to them? Things and feelings that shaped from raising/growing up with a person?
Why don't you go to such fathesr and ask them: "How often do you feel horny when interacting with your daughter and if you don't, did you train it away through guilt and disgust?"
In general, with females who have no close relation to you, you can simply focus your mind on something else, like what you were doing. When talking to them, you look them in the eyes and focus on the conversation (well that is the custom when having a conversation with any person really). It takes time to get sexually aroused and it is therefore a choice to let yourself be in a position where you get aroused and horny.
As for your second paragraph: I assumed that you made a general statement about "putting yourself on a pedestal" and therefore I replied with a general statement about it as well. Furthermore, when someone argues, they do not necessarely need to believe in the axioms they use to argue. One can assume certain axioms, then argue from that perspective without actually using those axioms normally. To continue, I would like to point out that what one person finds denigrating does not necessarely mean that the other person finds it to be denigrating as well.
As for your final paragraph: whether it matters or not strictly depends on your ideals and beliefs. Maybe the ideals and beliefs of a person in similar situation are such that feeling bad is the correct response and a response that matters.
I thought it was clear too, but evidently that may not be the case. Would have chosen a very different approach if it was merely about attraction. Hell, straight males can very well be attracted, but not sexually aroused, by symmetrical shapes among other men.
But that's like...every single debate on this site lol
.
I bet that TwoThreeFour is picturing you as basically an extreme deviant that always wears a gimp suit under his clothes "just in case," because you said you were "turned on" by images like Jessica Rabbit. And to him, that means "feeling great sexual desire." This is obviously false.
And on the same token, I am betting that you are seeing TwoThreeFour as a holier than thou proselytizer in denial of his very nature because he says you have no control since you get "turned on" by images like Jessica Rabbit. And to you (and me), turned on probably just means that you found something sexually attractive. This is obviously false as well.
Semantics
.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?