Anyone who pays close
attention to the controversies in the video game community should be no
stranger to the heated theory proposed by those who believe sexism is a permeating
issue within video games and, in some cases, society itself. Unfortunately,
this debate is remarkably one sided, with very few people on the other side of
the fence who, in many cases are too afraid to take a contrary stance in fear
of being publically shamed or called a sexist. But myself, being the low life
with no self respect as it is, take no issue with arguing the contrary. Not
that sexism doesn't exist in video games, of course it does, it exists in all
facets of life and it effects both genders, not just female by the way. My
stance, instead, is that despite the fact that sexism in video games exists, we
should take no action toward stopping it. Open your mind and take a journey
with me.
Drawing the battle lines.
In the thickest of fighting over the issue of video game sexism
stands an icon of gaming feminism, Anita Sarkeesian, host of Feminist Frequency
and champion of feminist gamers all over the world. She gained notoriety
through her Youtube channel, speaking at several conventions (including TEDx)
and most notably, the massive success of her Kickstarter project, Tropes vs
Women, which raised over $150,000, well past the targeted goal.
Naturally, trolls from every corner of the world were quick
to jump on the bandwagon and begin harassing Mrs. Sarkeesian and her followers.
But instead of ignoring them like any sensible vlogger would, she instead
dedicates entire speeches to denouncing the trolls and claiming they're part of
a massive coordinated "hate campaign" .
I've never, for instance, heard Anita address her alleged public shaming of Twitter
users. The Youtube user, Thunderf00t, for instance, has put together a
brilliant dissection of Anita's arguments, found here.
No sensible person has an issue with giving your opinion on
an open forum like Youtube, but when you complain about how feminists are being
misrepresented and then dedicate entire, syndicated speeches to misrepresenting
your opposition, that's when you should reexamine your arguments and see if
they would actually hold up to scrutiny without trolls to use as scapegoats.
You don't have a right to not be offended.
A few months ago, in the final week of last semester, I sat
with two other game design classes and watched a great presentation by game
industry veterans. At the front of the room they talked about their career
history, what games they worked on and gave us advice in their respective
fields before we plunged ourselves into the competitive world of video games.
One of the many moments that stuck with me, however, is when
the speaker spoke briefly on the difficulty of joining the gaming industry. At
one point he explained how few female game developers there were throughout the
industry and that he doesn't know why it had "taken so long for the game
industry to get more women". It was the way he phrased it that rubbed me
the wrong way. Was he suggesting that the gaming industry is a conscious being
that decides what gender ratio should be allowed to develop games? He seemed
completely oblivious to the fact that there is absolutely nothing preventing
women from obtaining a game design degree or starting an indie project. Instead
he tried to push the blame on to the industry itself for being
"anti-woman".
As I said at the start of this article, sexism in games
absolutely does exist but people seem to forget the reason. Back twenty or even
ten years ago, if you played video games, you were considered a loser. You hid
it from your friends and you hid it from any girls you knew. You were afraid to
reveal that you played video games. Video gamers were seen as nerds on the
lowest rung of the social ladder and often times they were simply by virtue of
the fact that throughout their young and teen years they were out caste by
members of the opposite sex. Video games were a male past time, especially back
then when most teens and tween girls wouldn't even touch gamers never mind pick
up a controller.
Eventually these gaming nerds grew up and began making their
own games. Entire game companies full of almost exclusively male developers.
And knowing that at the time there were so few female gamers and even fewer
female developers, they didn't have to worry about offending anyone and when
left to their own devices, a male majority will create male centric products. It's nature. But now it's 2013 and the number
of female gamers has increased dramatically and we are beginning to see
developers walk on egg shells as not to offend any potential female consumers. But
why is this a bad thing?
I think it is any developers artistic duty to offend their
viewers. Provoking thought through expression is the only way to create
compelling pieces of art. Instead what we see is an industry that is vastly
more censored than any other industry. For some reason, in the past few years,
comedy and video games have been under fire as the only artistic mediums that
are not allowed to be offensive. When Mayor Giuliani proposed the closure of an
art museum for containing works of art he found offensive, people were up in
arms about how censorship is the death of art. But for some reason, going after
game developers and comedians is considered admirable.
Censorship is the death of art. If you are
reading a book, or watching a movie or playing a video game and you are not
offended at some point in the story, than it has failed as a story telling
medium. Without anger or objection in a plot line, whether by gender or not, the story will
fail to engage readers or viewers.
And if your reasons for objecting to sexism in game is
personal, that the story does not suit your tastes and you wish the developers
took a different path so you could enjoy it more, than simply admit that is the
case. I wish the Transformers series was more in line with my tastes, but I
have accepted that Michael Bay's vision for Transformers is a vapid expression
of art. I didn't start a Kickstarter to speak out against bad directors, I
didn't make videos talking about how action movies have no place in the theatre,
I simply did not watch.
Societal damage.
Some may argue that sexism in video games promotes the 'rape
culture'. This ties once again with comedians being shouted down for rape
jokes. These people seem to miss the entire point of free expression. Free
expression isn't there to comfort you, it isn't there for you to mold into your
own personal soap box. Free expression allows for anyone to share their
opinions and vision, whether it be in a public forum or through an artistic
medium.
Harkin back to Mayor Giuliani trying to close an art museum
over offensive content. Now contrast that with the fact that many gamers,
myself included, consider video games to be a form of art. Are we, as gamers,
so willing to restrict and censor a form of art simply because we are afraid of
offending someone? If video games are an art as many of you say, than no amount
of offensive content would be grounds for removal or alteration. No amount of
sexism or racism or any content that one would deem offensive should be subject
to censorship or, god forbid, legal action. For years gamers have tried
convincing the masses that video games are a form of art, but how can they take
us seriously when even we ourselves do not treat video game as a form of art?
And if you deem that video games should be censored, than you have forfeited
all grounds to call video games an art. Censorship is the death of art.
Some feminists may also argue that sexism in video games
effect us as a whole on a societal level. This argument is not unlike the
debate on whether or not we should ban violent video games. The proponents of
this philosophy propose that the consumption of violent video games has
contributed to the murder rate, mass shootings, suicides and crime rate despite
the fact that the crime rate has seen a steady decline
even as video game consumption increases. This also rings true for sexism.
There is no study that suggests that sexism in video game has a direct correlation
with rape or violence toward women and in fact the number of rape and domestic
violence is decreasing with the overall crime rate. In fact, in countries where
abuse toward women is common, particularly countries like Kenya, Pakistan and Ethiopia,
the video game consumption rate is remarkably low.
It is logically impossible to take to the stance that
violence in video games does not affect society but sexism in video games does.
The bottom line.
If, after reading this article, you still maintain the
stance that sexism in video games is wrong, than you forfeit the right to call
video games a form of art through virtue of censorship. If you call video games
an art but still maintain your stance against sexism in video games than you
must admit that it is for a personal reason and that the best course of action
is to simply not partake in the purchase of said game.
If you maintain the argument that sexism in video games
effects society negatively, than you must also take the stance that violence in
video games also increases the murder and violent crime rate, in which case you
have lost the empirical argument given that a magnitude
of scientific studies has debunked
this claim. This arguments house of cards cannot stand under scientific scrutiny.
Should you take anything away from this article, let it be
this: Censorship is the death of art. Artists should be left to their own
devices without fear of censorship or scrutiny. Any rational human being would
not dump paint on a piece of art they found offensive, no rational human being
would prevent people from entering a movie theatre showing a movie they found
objectionable. No matter how offended you get, no matter how hateful the
content of a piece of art is, nothing should drive you to actively work for its
removal.
When a developer releases content you do not agree with,
simply do not purchase it. Any further action against that product would be
absolute selfishness.
"I think it is any developers artistic duty to offend their viewers. Provoking thought through expression is the only way to create compelling pieces of art."
ReplyDeleteYou know, I was thinking about raising an objection to your statement -- and likewise, the one that demands anger from the piece of art -- but I started to think that maybe I was going for too literal an interpretation. I get what you're saying here; it's all about challenging one's opinions and beliefs through the art instead of just trying to make them rage a bit. I'd argue that that's what a good villain is for -- they're in place to oppose certain ideas, whether they're proposed by the hero, the universe, or the story at large. That much is something I appreciate a lot in whatever story comes my way -- and something we can agree on, I hope.
As for sexism in games...yeah, I'll agree with you there as well. Granted I would think that expressing oneself has to be done within reason, but as long as there's purpose behind it and the intent isn't to harm anyone, then yes, censorship does no artist -- or the audience -- any favors.
Whatever the case, great post. I happened to notice that you had a link for your blog on Destructoid, and I just had this hunch that it was something worth following. Looks like my hunch was right.
Keep it up, all right?
Thanks, I'm hoping for another controversy soon. Writing every day drains content remarkably fast.
Delete