Your response to this baffles me. Of course there's a double standard. Women get approached by men far more often than men get approached by women. Haven't you said this yourself many times in the past ("women are the ones who choose; men are the ones who compete")?
I've often blogged about how men and women are different - yes. But each are equally culpable for their actions.
Yes, men are much more aggressive than women. That's how they are made. The result is that domestic violence is disproportionately a male on female phenomenon. This does not excuse men, however. And, I would not argue that a rampaging woman shouldn't receive the same sentence as a man. That would imply she is less culpable (i.e. inferior).
The premise of the support for this video game is that hurt feelings justify (pretend) violence. See!!! Men are so obnoxious! Couldn't you just kill them? This has historically been a male rationalization for why he beats on his woman. Notice I didn't say it was a good one
( ... )
I don't think this game should be taken as a policy platform. No one's suggesting that women become more spontaneously violent to combat misogyny, any more than someone's suggesting that blowing up a housing project is a valid means of protesting changes to its design. It's art. It's meant to invoke an emotional response, not advance a strategy.
In my opinion it's silly either way -- the total number of actual human beings killed in this game is zero. It's like crying about the horror and suffering in a Nuclear Missile attack in Civilization.
On some level, all criticism of video games (as has been done with movies, radio, papyrus) is that it has some effect on behavior in real life.
I think it does, to a certain point. I remember, as a kid, watching the movie The Warriors. I swear I wanted to get in a fight, right after. Did I? No.
I'm of the philosophy that violent people may get more violent because of external stimulus, but I disagree with the notion that any input (entertainment) MAKES someone do violence. People are either culpable for their entertainment diet, or we have to move Big Brother into every household. No.
As a tangential point: I played a US versus Soviet war game when I was a kid. At a certain point, if nuclear war broke out, a toll free number popped up. The recorded message was of people SCREAMING.
It's my understanding the access to violent video games, porn, etc, actually helps lower the instances of violence because people have an outlet... rather than teaching the behavior.
There were mass shootings well before there were video games or even TV. And before there were guns I have no doubt some crazy bastards played hack and slash through a village because they were pissed about something stupid.
Our entertainment should not be confined by the sociopaths and broken people who can't help themselves enough to get help. Our society is ignorant and lets fear lead them into making stupid judgments that lead to stupid regulations.
The only violence video games has inspired in me is throwing the controller or punching the keyboard. heh.
I get what pasquin is saying. I'm female and I get annoyed at the double standards as well but I just don't care about the realm of video games. If it was a game about men shooting women who turn him down I would tell the feminists boo-hoo. It's a video game!
I think that the double standards are an inevitable aspect of the shift in gender definition and roles. And since some aspects of the definitions haven't moved at all there's a lot of old school ideas still in play towards women. It's hard, as a female, not to fall into the double standard sometimes as a form of defense or even just to make myself feel a little less frustrated with the bullshit I experience because I don't have a dick. As a species and as many societies, we have a lot of growing to do in this area.
Firstly, The comparison isn't appropriate. Not responding favorably to a pickup line (which are often crude, unsolicited and threatening) is not the same as going out of your way to bother someone. Secondly, in real life lots of men do kill, rape and hurt women for turning them down. That's why making light of it in a game would be offensive. The number of women who've killed men for harassing them is far less, which is probably why few men feel bothered enough to cause outrage. Thirdly, saying "where's the outrage" is sorta off. Do you mean "why aren't men outraged?" or "why aren't women and feminists taking the time out of their schedule of fighting all the problems they face to take care of this non-issue that some men might feel upset about?"
There's a double standard here: if in a video game a woman kills guys, it's okay, but in the reverse feminists would be outraged. That's my point. Both examples I cited (and there are more) license the notion that female feelings alone legitimize violence. They are blind in the pink eye.
Me? I think sanctioning the idea that killing someone, of either sex (even virtually), just because they are obnoxious, is sickening. There's nothing empowering for women that occurs by modeling the worst of male behavior.
Feminism, IMO, loses credibility when it explicitly sanctions behaviors, by women, which they would condemn if done by a man. That's why I'm not one, I'm a humanist. I'm outraged by any abuse of humans. Regardless of category.
Comments 21
Reply
Yes, men are much more aggressive than women. That's how they are made. The result is that domestic violence is disproportionately a male on female phenomenon. This does not excuse men, however. And, I would not argue that a rampaging woman shouldn't receive the same sentence as a man. That would imply she is less culpable (i.e. inferior).
The premise of the support for this video game is that hurt feelings justify (pretend) violence. See!!! Men are so obnoxious! Couldn't you just kill them? This has historically been a male rationalization for why he beats on his woman. Notice I didn't say it was a good one ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Reply
On some level, all criticism of video games (as has been done with movies, radio, papyrus) is that it has some effect on behavior in real life.
I think it does, to a certain point. I remember, as a kid, watching the movie The Warriors. I swear I wanted to get in a fight, right after. Did I? No.
I'm of the philosophy that violent people may get more violent because of external stimulus, but I disagree with the notion that any input (entertainment) MAKES someone do violence. People are either culpable for their entertainment diet, or we have to move Big Brother into every household. No.
As a tangential point: I played a US versus Soviet war game when I was a kid. At a certain point, if nuclear war broke out, a toll free number popped up. The recorded message was of people SCREAMING.
Reply
There were mass shootings well before there were video games or even TV. And before there were guns I have no doubt some crazy bastards played hack and slash through a village because they were pissed about something stupid.
Our entertainment should not be confined by the sociopaths and broken people who can't help themselves enough to get help. Our society is ignorant and lets fear lead them into making stupid judgments that lead to stupid regulations.
The only violence video games has inspired in me is throwing the controller or punching the keyboard. heh.
Reply
I get what pasquin is saying. I'm female and I get annoyed at the double standards as well but I just don't care about the realm of video games. If it was a game about men shooting women who turn him down I would tell the feminists boo-hoo. It's a video game!
I think that the double standards are an inevitable aspect of the shift in gender definition and roles. And since some aspects of the definitions haven't moved at all there's a lot of old school ideas still in play towards women. It's hard, as a female, not to fall into the double standard sometimes as a form of defense or even just to make myself feel a little less frustrated with the bullshit I experience because I don't have a dick. As a species and as many societies, we have a lot of growing to do in this area.
Reply
Firstly, The comparison isn't appropriate. Not responding favorably to a pickup line (which are often crude, unsolicited and threatening) is not the same as going out of your way to bother someone. Secondly, in real life lots of men do kill, rape and hurt women for turning them down. That's why making light of it in a game would be offensive. The number of women who've killed men for harassing them is far less, which is probably why few men feel bothered enough to cause outrage. Thirdly, saying "where's the outrage" is sorta off. Do you mean "why aren't men outraged?" or "why aren't women and feminists taking the time out of their schedule of fighting all the problems they face to take care of this non-issue that some men might feel upset about?"
Reply
Me? I think sanctioning the idea that killing someone, of either sex (even virtually), just because they are obnoxious, is sickening. There's nothing empowering for women that occurs by modeling the worst of male behavior.
Feminism, IMO, loses credibility when it explicitly sanctions behaviors, by women, which they would condemn if done by a man. That's why I'm not one, I'm a humanist. I'm outraged by any abuse of humans. Regardless of category.
Reply
Leave a comment