-

-

 

I think gender and ethnic neutral games would probably just have robots only, and be fairly boring. It's also arrogant to assume a woman wouldn't like something and vice versa.

I guess farmville or flappy bird are also in the category you describe. In any case, the internet is full of people who want to feel and sound important by sounding off and making things seem like an issue when for 99.9% of the population, it really isn't, not with 7 billion people.

She has 150k followers so that's six billion nine hundred ninety-nine million eight hundred fifty thousand who don't follow her. I'm not saying feminism isn't a hot topic, far from it. I'm saying it shouldn't dictate what game you want to make.

If I sound outspoken about it, it's because I think people make a whole lot of fuss about nothing since people have a lot of time spare now they don't have to worry so much about survival.

 

Kings are higher than Queens in cards because the cards are based on medieval society where that was the case. Making a stink about that is about the same as demanding that history books be abolished because of all the intolerable prejudice in them.

All game genres appeal to all genders and orientations, to some extent. Trying to find genres that appeal equally seems absolutely pointless to me. You start with an idea, not a genre.

 

I don't think is hopeless, game development is about creative problem solving.
Its kind of interesting, I love card games (real and virtual). I love making card games. I got my start in this industry making card games (a couple of decades back). And not until you mentioned did it ever occur to me about the king and queen thing. It is interesting the things you don't see, or are just accustomed too.

An interesting topic. I assume you are talking about a card game using standard playing cards. My first though on it (at least in the gender part), is that most solutions would be counter to your goals. I mean, you could simply replace them with 10, 12, 13 (like a SkipBo), or pick something else that would be gender neutral. (like Goat, Mule and Horse). But in both cases would probably make the game less appealing to everyone due to unfamiliarity. And would probably say that the part of playing cards is an issue to very few if any. Or at least less the amount you would turn away by breaking tradition/familiarity. Interesting to think about.

Ethnicities and races is sort of easier, abstract/stylized. Doesn't have to be people. I have seen and made some that use chess pieces, and some that just use a stylized JKQA. Culture shouldn't be a problem, as most people understand the ranking system and/or know what kings and queens are even if they don't live in a society that has them.

A while back I stark graphically stylized set of card games that had a few face options :

Doesn't actually address your conundrum, but illustrates options. It'll be interesting to see what people come up with.

 

Unless they are sexy robots!

 

plenty of abstract board game style stuff that isn't gender related. Tic tac toe,..Go,..backgammon.
Maybe country of 'origin' related?

 

Regarding queen and king cards, in the UK we've always been fairly matriarchal, preferring our queens

Chess - the queen is the strongest and the king is the weakest. It's not all bad!

 

Tycoon/sim type games are mostly gender neutral, as well as some strategy games.
Civilization comes to mind, Firaxis did a pretty good job keeping it gender/ethnically neutral.

 

The whole Sarkeesian debate is not about games that "do not appeal" to women. It's about games that portrait men and women in a way that reinforces the stereotype of women being inferior to men, or men being active while women are passive and so on and so on.

Same thing with race issues. It's not about appealing to people of other ethnicities, it's about not making black people look inferiour to white people in your game, or about not rewarding the player with an archievement for shooting a certain number of black people (like Call of Juarez: The Cartel did).

And that's not an issue that's isolated in a single game, it's a bigger issue in the whole culture. Most games today have white, male, first-world, heterosexual player characters and everybody else is marginalized. A single game with a damsel in distress is not a problem. But if situations where male player characters rescue female non-player characters outnumber the reverse situation 10 to 1, that's quite a powerful stereotype and it will reinforce those stereotypes in at least a part of the audience. Pop culture forms reality.

 

The flip side of that though is the queen is the strongest regular piece, but the king plays by a completely different rule set.

My stance is there are plenty of gender neutral games. In fact the vast majority of games are. That doesn't mean you can't find some culturally sexist element in them, but a few elements present don't suddenly define an entire game as sexist. If we did, it could just as easily say Mario games are feminist as this one single woman is responsible for maintaining all order in the realm, and without her it crumbles.

It's really easy for me to see a lot of "feminist" issues as just wanting to replace sexist masculine bullshit with sexist feminine bullshit. It's really easy for people to lose sight of the middle ground when all they are concerned about are the extremes.


On a side jag, did anyone else see any irony in the last Sarkeesian video, that it was basically her beating up dead hookers to prove her point?

 

um, don't all the pieces play by different rules?

Agreed. I mean, I don't even understand why games are under attack when hollywood and mainstream entertainment is far worse (any michael bay film or rap music).

If you really want to see women treated as equals the best place to begin is with countries that regularly treat women like a subspecies. That generally isn't going to be the west, much less, video games. So, outside of equal rights in the workplace (which I believe passionately in) I think there are zero issue in games. It's just entertainment.

I'm not going to suddenly stand up and attack Desperate Housewives or Sex in the City just because they portray all men as being infantile sex driven idiots. I understand it's entertainment for women, and that's cool, I don't watch.

Much ado about nothing when it comes to entertainment. Far more pressing real world issues.

 

Not in terms of how they are captured, which is most of what I was thinking of.

 

Chess would probably not be such a good game if you couldn't corner the king to check him. And that's a very telling thing. Perhaps striving for complete equality would make for a pretty boring experience in some games.

 

Here is a list.

It's simple:
Don't reduce millions and millions of people to "black or white" and "male or female".
Games don't appeal to groups, they appeal to individual people. Just like every other medium.

If people bring up such petty """"""arguments"""""", why would you give even half a S***?

YOU should make the game YOU want to make. Forced political correctness is buuuuuuuuuuullshit.
Some people feel excluded? They're not entitled to have every game catered towards their special wishes. It's their opinion to like something or not. If they don't like something, it's their damn problem.
Some people feel offended? You're responsible for what you do. How you deal with it, should depend on the individual situation.

 

I resoundingly agree with this.

But I also agree with this:

I don't agree with other stuff TheSniperFan said, but that isn't important.

Games will appeal to different people in different ways. If you make a game with weak female characters, some women may not play them. Does that matter to you? If you make a game where the woman is the strong main character and men are secondary, some men will not play the game. Does that matter to you?

If you put offensive stuff in your game, whether stereotypes or whatever, you will cut out some customers, unless you are so offensive that you get publicity for being offensive! But of course, it is your choice. You can make whatever you want and deal with the consequences, good or bad.

If you make a game like modern TV shows, you will have a mix of strong females, strong males, and their secondary sidekicks. It will appeal to a general audience, men and women. You will have a wider audience. This is the biggest reason to avoid stereotypes in games, in my honest opinion. You will attract more customers. Same is true of racial stereotypes. And quite honestly, it is always fun to nix stereotypes of your common fantasy or horror characters as well. Why not a male witch in your horror game or a female knight in your fantasy game? At least it makes your story more interesting. George RR Martin did it well, with the intelligent thoughtful dwarf and a strong commanding female. What a refreshing idea and Peter Dinklage really IS sexy, isn't he? Talk about breaking stereotypes!

As for the moral responsibility of a game to not enforce cultural stereotypes, I think that is a personal decision. We have to all live with ourselves at the end of the day, right?

 

I would skew that toward making games for an audience you understand. If your track record for understanding women is pretty S***, it's probably not the audience you want to target.

At the end of the day, if women want more games meant for them, there is no other way than getting more women into making games.

 

When game designers consistently make women look like brainless eyecandy in games, they are drawing a dividing line between men and women. It's not Anita Sarkeesian who does that. She just points it out.

And why should game makers care? Not because anybody is pointing a gun at their face, obviously, but because equality is part of the promise any western democracy gives its citizens. Well, except for the US ("All men are created equal, unless they are black or gay or we don't like them for some other reason, and also, women don't really count"), I guess. And equality is not just something the state writes on dusty old paper. It can only work when people actually actively support it in their everyday life. If they don't do that, the democratic promise fails.

That is why creating games that promote sexism, racism, ableism or any of the other -isms I can't think of at this time of the day is bad. Not every game has to make the world a better place, but it would be really nice if games wouldn't reinforce century-old stereotypes all of the time.

Game makers have a responsibility for their works and for the medium. And I, for one, would rather have my games stand for acceptance and equality than for closeminded male superiority BS. If you disagree, that's fine, but then I will probably find better ways to spend my time than playing your games.

 

But, why are games targeted? why not target films? tv shows? books? music? porn?

Because those mediums have been offending long before video games ever existed. I object quite a bit to video games being a target here. Video games are currently easy prey I suspect for people to get on a soap box and feel heard. That's ok, that's cool. But I'm not going to take it seriously, when there are far worse offenders out there, doing actual damage as opposed to mario attempting to rescue princess peach.

In any case, there's something wrong with a game that even has hookers in it, let alone beating them up. And that's a deeper flaw than just being abusive to females. That's a game glorifying the baseness of human nature in all it's forms.

For some, it's entertainment. For me it's not.

 

Why are games targeted? Because it's just a way bigger problem in games than in TV shows or books or movies. [Porn is a can of worms too big for this thread, I guess, and in music, attitudes towards race and gender differ way too much from genre to genre to discuss this on a broad scale here.]

Triple-A gaming is far less inclusive than big movies or TV shows are, at least that's my observation. Also, Sarkeesian HAS critizised sexism in other media, and she has never got such a S***storm like the one she got when she did the same for video games. That quite often gets overlooked, because it gets in the way of all that nice "she wants the attention, so it's her own fault if she gets rape threats" victim blaming. But again, I'm digressing.

And Mario rescuing Peach is a pretty harmless example, yes. But there are worse offenders in the gaming scene. You know Call of Juarez? If not, watch this video by Extra Credits:

.

And there is just so much underlying discrimination in the industry, like the whole AC4 debacle ("We have four-player coop, but our budget only allowed it to create the same generic white mustache dude four times and change the clothes a bit"), Tomodachi Life ("We didn't include gay people because this game is just intended to be fun and apparently, gay people somehow stand in the way of that") or how GTA V hasn't got a single female player character and so on. Seriously, there are just so few female PCs in games!

And again, it's not about single games. It's about those small things that somehow everybody does and has been doing since the Atari 2600. Nobody would bat an eyelash at a male PC who has to rescue a female NPC (possibly Love Interest) if the same scenario but gender-flipped would also happen from time to time, and not just as comic relief. But when it's always the strong male who saves the weak female, it really enforces the stereotype over time. Also, it's really lazy storytelling, which should make you angry even if gender issues don't interest you.

Addendum: Also, games are not "targeted", because those people critizising those attitudes are not in some way fighting against games. They - and me as well - are trying to shape games into a direction that they think would make them better, which is the very objective of cultural criticism in all forms. And criticism of misoginy, portrayal of racial issues et cetera in TV shows, music, movies, literature, and yeah, even in porn, is definitely a thing. Why not in video games as well?

 

Cool, but I'm not letting it influence us at all. I think it's pretty easy to overreact.

Except it's borne from absolute truth. The man is physically superior and in the past, pretty much did rescue the female from whatever issue was at hand.

These days, females can rescue themselves. But, many of them enjoy being rescued. I'm talking about figuratively, here. There's a lot of attraction to a big strong man rescuing you, for some females. That alone, calls your argument out as being on really thin ground.

You're making it out as being an influential factor, when it's really an observational factor. Certainly, repetition of media can influence and make something real, yes. It's just NOT the case in games and this situation though. Unless of course you're misguided enough to believe its a recent phenomenon and the whole knight in shining armour stuff doesn't exist.

 

Yeah? Getting into "Nature vs. Nurture" territory here. Sentences like "The man is physically superior" are really, really misogynistic and I know places where you would get a warning for sprouting stuff like that off.

Guess what? Not all women have exactly the same mindset. Arguments including "many" in debates about inclusivity are a horrible idea, because they marginalize those women who would very much prefer not to need rescues. And I doubt women playing New Super Mario Brothers identify with Peach instead of Mario.

So I don't see how your argument relates in any way to mine.

Oh, you are using capital letters, so it's got to be true. Any arguments for that or should I just take your word for it?

Any media can influence people's world view. Why should books, films, TV series have that power but not videogames? That's just ridiculous.

Ooh, I have a feeling terms like "Social Justice Warrior" are about to be thrown around. That's going to be FUN.

 

HOW DO YOU THINK THE TWELVE FEELS ABOUT THIS!?

 

You're right, it was totally uncool of him to bring reality into the argument; I sincerely apologize on behalf of Hippocoder.


Cereally Sincerely,
Dan.

 

I'll just leave that there to let some reality simmer.

Eyecandy sure, but brainless? I suppose I'm not playing enough dudebro games, because I can't think of any games with any women that are out right stupid (ignoring AI). Hell, I don't think I've played many games recently where the eyecandy was any good either.

The reason why games are being targeted for being misogynist is because it's an unbalanced market. The primary game playing/game buying market is male by huge margins. If you threw out most movies explicitly intended for a female demographic, you would find movies to have just as much sexist bullshit as games.

 

It seems to me that you're hijacking your own discussion. Is this about gender and ethnic neutral games or about your hate for Sarkeesian?

That said, I'll be banal and say that any good game without blatant sexism/racism/fundamentalism/nationalism/blahblahism will appeal to pretty wide audiences independently of their gender/etc. Obviously when talking about wide groups of people there are other gaps that are related to each nation's culture, but I suppose that's a different matter. Or maybe not.

 

I find all this stuff about Sarkeesian a bore. I do not condone death threats or harassment at all, I don't care what side they're on, both sides have done it and it doesn't help anyone except the trolls.

I'm so sick of hearing about Sarkeesian that I've stopped watching some of my favorite youtubers(thunderf00t) because they won't stop talking about it; these guys are like oxygen for the flame. You should just ignore Sarkeesian and move on, a lot of people that were preoccupied with Sarkeesian are now focused on corruption in the game journalism industry.

 

That is the basic idea. Just try not to piss anyone off and make the characters attractive, and you end up with squenix's recipe for a final fantasy game. Oh yeah, throw in a crystal or two.

It's not like it's hard to make a game who's audience is irrespective of the gender divide, but it's usually much easier to market to dudebros by throwing in gratuitous action and some tig o' bitties.

Actually, I would be more than willing to bet marketing departments (or the act of marketing in general) are far more responsible for sexism in the industry (both real and imaginary). Even the prominence of the damsel in distress is likely down to simplifying the story to "save the girl". Three words, thirteen characters and you can just get into the meat of it all.

 

With all due respect, games are targeted HERE because this is a GAME developer forum for UNITY! LOL

TV shows and movies have been targeted for years. They still stereotype, they still can be racist and sexist and all sorts of other things, but they are criticized for this. TV shows especially try to be gender and race neutral. Some shows, like Grey's Anatomy, even use racial blindness when casting. Others, like Once Upon a Time, completely stomp on the fairy tale princess stereotype by portraying very strong, even combat oriented princesses. Game of Thrones is a TV show that I mentioned already, totally breaking stereotypes. Of course, there are as many TV/Movies that do the opposite.

But, we are not talking about movies or TV shows, are we? Defensive a little?

Oh, and I love how you talk about women. Stereotypes? You have them down very well. In fact, too bad for you that it is all untrue. The vast majority of women do not enjoy being rescued and we like brains over brawn. We also hate being called helpless or stupid, as you are implying since you think we have such little minds that we are somehow hypnotized by physical beauty. Tell ya something, it isn't the female developers that put our men in sexy armor that shows off much of their bodies. Maybe it is the male fantasy to be rescued by muscular women in leather bikini's rather than the other way around.

How many great discussions here deteriorate into insults? Sad..and from a moderator...sighs. I was enjoying this but time to go before I explode into little pink ribbons.

 

Uh, men are physically way superior. Taller, more muscle mass etc. It's physics, and relates because it's part of the discussion regarding why a man considers himself a protector, or rescuer, and why sometimes women like to feel secure. It's not weakness, never has been weakness. It's a nice and lovely thing to open a door for a woman and display a lack of physical dominance. In a way, that's a man submitting, or at least showing her, he respects her. It's old school, but thankfully it's coming back in fashion since both parties kind of like it.

You're confusing me with this whole identification thing, because an old GF of mine used to love mario. She didn't identify with either. Do you have to identify to enjoy the fun? wow. Maybe people should lobby sega because it's kinda hard to identify with a hedgehog. Since when did the desire to rescue someone matter what sex the character is or impair the enjoyment?

Sure, but I think you're going way overboard here, what with porn and other forms of media going way too far. Rape, degradation, beatings and constant abuse are rife in media all around us. All of these (film, book, music) are offset not by people trying to shout louder, but by people making works of art that offset this. Romance, harrowing and real human stories and other reflective works are made. So perhaps feminists should make games instead of just smack talking. Because trying to prevent it happening in games can't be done. You need to prevent it in all forms of entertainment. Short of making it legal, it's not happening. Show by example. If you care so much, make a game based on it. I guess you won't though, since you can just babble on the internet and sleep well at night in your bubble.

Kind of a weird response. I didn't understand it.

 

Now you're just being weird. It's a discussion that does relate very much due to it being a form of entertainment.

How does defensive enter into it?

 

Not in my experience, if I asked my girlfriend right now she'd say that all her friends would love a muscular sexy Australian guy to rescue them. Maybe they're all shallow, but it's pretty obvious that it's not so much of a minority as you'd like to claim.

Who's calling women stupid? Who's calling them helpless? Don't misrepresent what he's saying or skew it.

Also, who's saying anyone's hypnotized by physical beauty? We all like it and if a person doesn't, then they're a minority...guaranteed.

What about all those sexy guys with clothes that show off their body to sell something?


It's always some handsome looking guy in the story of games, why can't we represent more diverse groups of males too? Gosh, even the geeky guys are athletically built & hot when you take off their stereotypical glasses.

 

Dabeh, I know nothing about Australian women so can't at all respond to that. LOL Maybe it is cultural, but I read Hippos response to my daughters and they were appalled. And every friend I have would be appalled. So again, maybe it is different in different parts of the world.

Stupid...stupid is thinking that a strong man is going to rescue us and not only thinking that, but expecting or desiring that. No, most women are not that stupid. Some might have little choice, be desperate, abused and have low self-esteem, but they do not want to be rescued..they just have no other option. Rescue is the last resort, not the optimal situation for anyone. Rescue implies dependence which takes control away from a person. It is dangerous and often leads to abuse and misery. Independence leads to strength and loving someone for more than what they can do for you leads to companionship and comfort. Rescue is not romantic or sexy.

We all admire beauty, but we are not all turned into hypnotized zombies because of it. Thank goodness for that! We don't all marry a guy because he is good looking. Some of us marry guys because they are funny, or smart, or ambitious or kind.

Those sexy guys with little clothing are selling movies, games and products that appeal to men. It is because men believe that to get the girl they must be sexy and muscular. It is not true. The Wolverine movie poster is not selling the movie to girls.

Stereotypes....that women prefer men with lots of muscles, that men all want muscles, that women like to be helpless and depend on men, that men prefer helpless dependent women, that because your girlfriend's friends like to be rescued, all women also do as well. Those men and women are not the majority. We are all so much more complex. They are stereotypes based on our modern culture that has made beauty so important. Notice that the number of beautiful fit people in movies is much higher than in our real lives? We tend to get fooled into thinking the movies are real life.

BTW, the OP started this topic to talk about genres of games that appeal to both men and women. Yet somehow it warped into defining both men and women with stereotypes. I get upset over stuff like this because I have three daughters and a son. I do not want them believe this stuff that you guys believe. I don't want them to want to be rescued or think they must have the ability rescue. I want all of them to have strong, confident, smart mates whom they can share their lives with and be happy. I want them to play games where they learn that they are the ones in control of their destiny.

Oh, and yeah, give me a geeky guy anytime! And two of my daughters, they love geeky guys too. I married a geeky guy, an engineer.

PS. I have been told Hippocoder is a nice guy and I am sure that is true. Sorry if I was so hard on him. I was just a bit shocked. lol I don't meet guys who say those things very often in my world so it took me by surprise.

 

Yeah I think it's just you're probably reading too much into it.

I am saying I think it's ok to be strong and clever. I expect females to also be strong and clever. That doesn't change if I open a door, which is a thing called being a gentleman. If you have to read into it, and try to diagnose what I mean, then consider it the male attempting to show that he would like her to be first. If that's a problem then perhaps I should stop typing, since I clearly do not understand the issue.

 

A lot of it depends on context. Largely throughout history, women have been subservient to men, as is evident in the deck of cards. So if your game has anything to do with history, it's mostly ok to explore those differences.

Now, if you're making a non-historical game that tells women to "get back in the kitchen", you might ruffle some feathers ...

 

The kinds of people that buy a game because of it's politics are probably the smallest minority of all.

 

I am a humongous fan of mma (both men and women), and just for the record, being able to protect yourself/others is FAR MORE a matter of skill/training than physical size/strength. Yes a well-trained big muscular person will beat a well-trained small person, but I would dare venture to say the majority of men in America have close to no *real* unarmed combat training whatsoever, and the average man would be mere cannon fodder for a professional female fighter.

The point of this post is that yes, women can absolutely kick major ass, should they choose to train in combat arts. So you can feel free to put kick-ass female characters in your games and not feel like you are "pandering" to "weak" females. Examples:

Small well-trained female mma fighter vs larger poorly-trained male:

Professional female BJJ practitioner grappling with trained male US Marine:

Female MMA highlights (WARNING: not for the squeamish):

I would bet *very good* money that every single woman in the following photo could beat up every male developer in the Unity forums who has little-to-no mma sparring experience. They average about 135 lbs in weight, but would easily submit or knock out an untrained man who weighs 50 pounds more.

 

It's a pretty silly post for reasons I don't need to explain. While I'd love it if all women could kick ass like that, it's a statistical non existence for normal people (both male and female). Unless where you live, the majority of people are MMA experts? No... thought not.

 

I appreciate why you posted that @eridani, but even male supremacists (or at least the ones who's brain didn't take way too much sun) know that a trained female can kick ass. Thinking it's a point worth of note is being, uh, sexist (which is the contrary of what you wanted to be, I know).

That said, @hippocoder you sported a bad choice of words. Males are physically "superior"? Sure, the average male is physically stronger than the average woman, but muscles don't mean superiority. For example, females live longer, can sprout new lives, hardly get bald and so on. I don't want to enter a contest about who's physically superior since that would be pretty silly now, and I know you just used a bad wording: I'm just saying

 

When angry white dudes say they want "gender and ethnically neutral games", what they really mean is that they want everyone who's not an angry white dude to stop having their own opinions and just agree to like what angry white dudes like.

Things that appear "neutral" to angry white dudes will tend to look non-neutral to everyone who is not an angry white dude. Things that appear "neutral" to people of other cultures will tend to appear non-neutral to angry white dudes. There is no such thing as neutral. Everything is cultural, and everything is political.

 

Neutralizing can mean two different things:

1. Preventing / ignoring expression of culture from or about groups.
2. Removing power differences between groups.

You can do #2 without #1. Well, you should be able to anyway ...

 

Okay, whatever. This discussion jumped the shark when it was about not putting people into categories first and then about whether males or females had the bigger penis. Whoops, bad metaphor, but you get the point I hope.

The thing about inclusivity is this: Every person on this planet is an individuum, and it is not okay to judge anybody because they are a woman, gay or black. Even if the average woman is weaker than the average man (and again, that's at least partially nature vs. nurture territory), that gives nobody the right to claim that "women are weaker than men" as if that were some kind of universal truth. That's just stereotyping.

And I was not hijacking the discussion, I was just pointing out that the original question just misses the point entirely. Again: It is not about games that appeal, or do not appeal, or cater, or do not cater, to certain genders, ethnicities, sexual identities et cetera. It is about games that do not promote a world view in which certain people are only second-class humans.

If you really want to "solve" gender and racial issues by just being inoffensive towards everybody, stick with games that do not reflect upon gender, race et cetera at all. In short: Create games that do not have characters. Tetris clones, space shooters, and so on.

But that doesn't make these issues go away. It just means you can just ignore them.

 

Uh? *_* I don't remember name-calling, slandering, pot-shotting or purposefully ruining anything for my "selfish purposes". I just replied to some posts in what I hoped was a polite way, even if I disagreed with some. This is the gossip section, so things can go a little off-topic sometimes. Why so much hate? You should relax instead than making things up.

 

Well I might have used the word "hate" (instead than "dislike") which was too strong, for which I will even apologize. But I won't apologize for saying "hijacking" since you used that first, and you kind of generated the off-topic galore by mentioning Sarkeesian in your original post (from which the "hijacking"). Nothing serious really, but that comment of mine might have been wrong (or not) but not off-topic.

 

I find myself agreeing with the majority of your post when it's more written out, I'm not sure why that is.

Let's take two completely random people of the same age, one representing each gender. Now, how much are you willing to bet that the girl will win the fight if we pit them up against each other? I'd bet a lot of my money the guy would win.

It's not a claim, it's a fact.

Errr...k.

Reverse racism...ha.



Life might just be really different here in Australia than the other parts of the world, but where I live there are so many demographics of people that you really don't notice or care about race. Lots of people travel to my city to live and study from all around the world. In fact, if I went to the library right now I'd be the representing the minority.

 

Game characters are archetypal. It is much easier for the brain to quickly slot a set of character traits to. These archetypes are not determined by some feminazi posting on the www. They are built into the brain visualization process themselves through multi-generational perceptual reinforcement coupled with real world outcomes of an experiential mode and play out the same in our dream worlds. Alter these built in perception too much and cognitive dissonance kicks in. Cognitive dissonance is not your friend in a survival situation. This is a poor and ongoing attempt to artificially mask and eventually erase our natural sensibilities and roles. Of course male characters rescue kidnapped or in distress females. That is archetypal and has played out in real millions of times. Also..some 14 y.o. popping his first pubes and hetero is not going to be all gung ho about saving some dude with a beard and armored belly.

 

Uhh so now I'm "purposely ruining this discussion for their own selfish reasons and preventing meaningful dialogue with pot-shots, hateful name-calling, and borderline slander" AAAND being "hateful". I tried to explain, I even apologized for one thing, and all you did was edit your previous post to add that with no reason at all (as your previous statements). Congratulations and applause.

(I apologize to the rest of the thread for taking the bait: I'll stop this silly defense of mine now and ignore the guy )

 

Meh, I'm out of here. I do not participate in discussions where "feminazi" is an acceptable term.

Bye.

 

I don't think you understood his point. It wasn't used in a derogatory sense.

 

The term "Feminazi" is, in itself, derogatory.