Sexism Still a Problem At E3 737
An anonymous reader writes "Now that E3 has wound down and the big product announcements are out of the way, its time to take a step back and look at the culture represented by the giant gaming show. 'The presence of scantily clad women hawking games and gizmos seemed in particular contrast to a report released this week by the Entertainment Software Association, which organizes the gaming industry's annual trade show. It found that 45 percent of the entire gaming population is now women, and women make up 46 percent of the most frequent game buyers.' While there are fewer 'booth babes' than in earlier shows (and while some are trying to bring balance by adding 'booth bros'), the conference organizers are happy to let exhibitors make their own policy. By contrast, the Penny Arcade Expo forbids 'booth babes,' a controversial but widely lauded stance. A recent article in Kotaku about this year's E3 notes, 'For every confident cosplayer who might do the job at a con, I am seeing dozens of companies trying to sell me hundreds of women. They are not drawing my attention to the content of their games, or to their tactics or techniques. They are drawing my attention to thigh-high boots, to low-cut shirts, and, frankly, to the hard work of a really expensive bra. So much of what I see here at E3 is aimed directly at the lizard hindbrain of a 13-year-old boy. But you have to be 18 to get into the show, and it's nominally for industry professionals. Perhaps someday we—men and women alike—can all be treated like the grown-ups we theoretically are, and be trusted to judge a game by its content... not its double-D cover.'"
doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:5, Insightful)
If the industry's most prominent trade show looks like it was organized by teenage boys, it's not going to do much to dispel the stereotype that games are just something for teenage boys.
This is bullshit. (Score:3, Insightful)
Every industry does the same thing, it's just the gaming industry folk live in caves and don't have any clue what happens outside their cave.
This is stupid (Score:4, Insightful)
Problem? (Score:4, Insightful)
I have no problem with scantily clad women. I know many women who have no problem (and rather enjoy) scantily clad women. Just cause it's a problem to you doesn't mean it's a problem to everyone else.
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:5, Insightful)
Agreed, it's stupid (Score:2, Insightful)
E3 exists to show off games and try to get people into the idea of buying them, not to pander to feminist sensibilities.
It so absolutely makes business sense to repel half of your target market (and more than that of your potential target market) in order to pursue a small marginal edge in your existing customer base.
Well, that or maybe the corporate management are indulging themselves at the expense of the business itself. But we know that that never happens.
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps some day we - men and women alike - can act like the grown-ups we theoretically are and not get offended by the sight of the human body. The US had a shit fit over the sight of a tasselled nipple at a sporting event but regularly enjoys media which features vagabond refugees shooting 'dead' people in the face. The endgame of extremist feminists looks very like that of extremist religions, with women chastely covered up and seperated from the lecherous menfolk for fear they will be overcome by their urges.
These backwards puritans are why US society is as demented as it is. Sort yourselves out.
Re:This is stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
Not to mention that the PAX ban doesn't, well, work. There are still booth babes in the expo hall. As far as I know, they have to be able to answer questions about the game/games being demoed at the booth, and then they "aren't a booth babe" any more.
So you wind up with a whole bunch of costumed female presenters who "aren't booth babes" in the PAX expo hall, and PAX can act all self-righteous.
Re:Problem? (Score:2, Insightful)
Just cause it's a problem to you doesn't mean it's a problem to everyone else.
Or alternately, just because it's fine with you doesn't mean that it's cool with others. I notice that you're stuck speculating because apparenlty you've never actually, like, talked with (or more to the point, listented to) women on the subject. Hmmmmm.
More Booth Bros & Babes (Score:4, Insightful)
While there are fewer 'booth babes' than in earlier shows (and while some are trying to bring balance by adding 'booth bros')
Now that is a solution I can get behind. I'm not a hot guy. But I'm not full of shit either -- I know that straight women like hot guys, just like straight men like hot women. There's a hundred thousand years of evolution behind it. Pretending it is not true is stupid. Women are naturally drawn to men with a pronounced V shape from their waist to their shoulders -- a trait I do not posess. And men are naturally drawn to big chests. That is reality.
You can argue that it is not sound economic policy, because it directs consumer spending in ways that are not reflective of product quality. Fine, let's talk about that, and maybe start by making advertising not count as a business expense for tax purposes. But if you are upset because it is objectification (or, more realistically, because you are, like me, not hot) -- you've got to get over it. Pretending it is not true is just lying to yourself. It will not change reality.
Re:This is stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
Politically correct nonsense (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a perfect match. Tweaking the libido is entertainment. Games are entertainment. The age group here is largely young adult, sexually aware.
So, several things. First, the idea that the female psyche isn't tweaked by up front sexuality? That's dead at the door. It's a social thing right now to pretend that sexuality is "mommy magic" and shouldn't be in play, but that is, and has been for decades, just a toxic result of radical women's lib propaganda. Now that is not saying that women shouldn't have equal opportunity in jobs, salary, medical care, marriage, etc -- not at all. Equal opportunity in matters that are not themselves tied to one's sexuality is good (I don't need equal access to an obstetrician, women don't need equal access to a dick doctor. Few will hire a fellow to strip for other fellows, likewise few would hire women to strip for other women. Etc.) But it is saying that the sexes are different, and that's a good thing, and an interesting thing, and altogether something to be celebrated, elevated, emphasized and above all enjoyed.
Next, and standing all by itself, there's *nothing* wrong with marketing one's natural advantages. We do it with minds that are able to wrap around programming and engineering. Athletes do it with bodies that are able to excel under the stresses of sports, pro and amateur. Actors and models do it with looks that please the audience. And so on, ad infinitum. What's absolutely disgusting is when some idiot steps in and decides that some characteristic, sensuality and looks being perfect examples, isn't "appropriate" for someone to use, either personally, or by employing a third party to "bring" it.
Do people with natural advantages have an easier time going down various roads in life? Yes, they do. Do we have *any* right to say that they should not, or cannot, use those advantages to travel those roads? No, we don't -- there's nowhere to derive such a right from.
Here's an important tip on the term "liberation": When you find yourself saying "sure, you can choose to do that if you like", most probably, you're engaged in something along the lines of liberation. However, when you find yourself saying "you can't do that", you really need to look hard at what you're saying because most likely, what you're engaged in is repression, probably direct and senseless repression at that.
If there's something to question about the marketing here, it might be raised as, "Where are the handsome guys as marketing tweaks for the ladies"? If the buying audience is truly equally distributed between the sexes, then if the game companies have any sense (debatable, where's my new MechAssault?) then they'll hit the women in the same nerve centers. You think they don't enjoy interacting with hunky guys? Oh, silly, silly you. :)
And of course, if good looking people, highly sexual people, or people with moles offend ye, then avoid them, by all means. Just don't tell the rest of us what it is we can, should, or will enjoy.
I raise my glass to those who make personal, informed choices.
I raise my middle finger to those who would interfere with them.
Now, let the politically correct bunk commence.
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:5, Insightful)
Most at 30 are just smart enough to pretend otherwise to avoid arousing politically correct morons.
FTFY
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:5, Insightful)
Ooh, 'politically correct'. How about "Most at 30 are just smart enough to handle the concept of 'situational relevance'"
Re:This is stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
Not to mention that all kinds of people sell their bodies. Carpenters sell they're spines, factory assembler's their carpal tunnels, firefighters their lungs. We just happen to live in a prudish society that demeans renting out one's sexual bits, even though it is probably easier to keep them from getting damaged than it is to prevent the other types of physical problems people accept money for on a daily basis.
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:4, Insightful)
Surprised they didn't bring this little gem up... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Agreed, it's stupid (Score:2, Insightful)
Why are women so offended when they see over idealized, attractive women advertising products?
First of all, it contributes to the objectification of women. The pervasive idea in our society that women are pretty things to parade around, and if you're really successful, then you'll get one of your very own to show off to your friends. This hurts men too, by the way -- it pushes the idea that your value as a man is directly proportional to your ability to attract a beautiful woman.
Your analogy to using attractive men to sell, e.g., clothing doesn't work. In those cases, the message is "Buy our product, and look like this!" Booth babes aren't promoting that sort of message. They're just eye candy for the straight men.
Which brings me to the second point: even if a woman isn't offended, she still gets the message that she's not really wanted. When you so blatantly target your marketing towards men, it sends the message that your product isn't for women. (Yes, lesbians might enjoy the booth babes too, but they still know that they're not the target demographic.)
Re:Problem? (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, you're wrong. I have many female friend active in the cosplay/costuming scene at conventions. Many of them dress in revealing costumes of their favorite characters. I have had discussions with them about this subject and they think the women who make a big deal of it are self conscious and whiney. I have many other friends are well educated who also think that the whole thing is blown out of proportion. So I have talked with and have listened to many women on the subject. If you don't like it then don't buy their games/products, it's that simple.
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:4, Insightful)
Since the 80's guys (or young men) that played video games were mocked as being undesirable by women. Often this was done by women themselves. Now all of a sudden they decide they want in on what we've loved for years and fuck you it needs to change now.
Fuck that noise.
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:5, Insightful)
What's serious about a game? Seriously.
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:4, Insightful)
So? This still doesn't help people take the games seriously.
And the worst thing in the world is people not taking games seriously.
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:5, Insightful)
Uh...damn it. I remember when booth babes were attractive, I was E3 1997 and '98, but out of all those pictures I really saw 3-4 that would cover "attractive." But let's be realistic, E3 has nothing, and I mean nothing on automakers and the big car shows.
Re:Agreed, it's stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
Pardon my ignorance, by why is it repulsive to see attractive people at product promotion booths?
It's not, and as one of the linked articles pointed out, the ban on booth babes at PAX didn't stop some companies having attractive women there to sell stuff -- the difference being that said women were dressed normally, and actually knew all about what they were selling (that is, they were regular salespeople for the company that happened to be women). If you can't see the difference between that and booth babes then you are part of the problem.
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not sure about you, but I'm a man with advanced features like "a brain" and "thought processes", rather than an automaton that runs purely on "hardwired" stimulus-response reactions.
Re:This is bullshit. (Score:4, Insightful)
Every industry does the same thing
This is absolutely not true. The vast majority of industry trade shows look quite professional. A small minority of industries that attract people with developmental problems (automobiles, guns, and games) don't.
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:3, Insightful)
Who is treating them as objects? Could it be the ones who are using them as pawns to score cheap political points?
Because after all, nothing says "you're a real person" more than acting offended by the fact that *some* women can make money by being attractive and pleasant.
Re:Problem? (Score:5, Insightful)
Or alternately, just because it's fine with you doesn't mean that it's cool with others. I notice that you're stuck speculating because apparenlty you've never actually, like, talked with (or more to the point, listented to) women on the subject. Hmmmmm.
While I'm in the difficult position of being a woman speaking up on this subject and, of course, feeling in no small way like I have to represent all of womankind when making these comments (guys -- you ever have that problem? Didn't think so)... I'll simply say that, as a general statement, women don't have a problem with other women dressing slutty publicly... they have a problem with it privately. Probably because we're jealous, insecure, and petty on the whole and any woman more attractive than we are is a threat that must be managed or eliminated... the inevitable source of so many cat fights. So it's not dressing slutty to attract men per se that's the problem... or rather, it's not the men's reaction to slutty dressing that causes so much grief... but rather other women's reactions to it.
Not to say that there isn't a wide diversity of opinion... because let's face it: There's more variation within the genders than between them... and it's hard to make generalized statements at all without finding a significant portion left out. But, that said... as a general statement, I'd stand by what I said. See also: Halloween.
Re:Agreed, it's stupid (Score:4, Insightful)
Feminism has never been about equality. Equal Rights Movements were about equal rights. The two aren't the same.
Some 45% of gamers are women. They don't care. This is a small vocal minority that is complaining. You can (and should) ignore them.
I believe in equal rights for all. No special rights for anyone.
Re: doesn't help people take games seriously eithe (Score:4, Insightful)
Why would I want to hit on every busty 20-year-old? Attraction among advanced creatures like humans is based on considerably more than mere first-physical-sight. There are women I'm attracted to and those I'm not, and this is not usually based on randomly pointing to people I pass on the street...
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:5, Insightful)
I support equality, equality of opportunity, equality of rights, and equality of compensation, let every man or woman stand on their own merits. As long as feminism supports that goal, I will support feminism.
Re:Agreed, it's stupid (Score:4, Insightful)
Look at what those statistics actually say.
The first says women make up "45% of the entire gaming community." This includes mobile games like Candy Crush Saga and Words with Friends that aren't represented at E3. Women play video games. It doesn't mean they're playing the same video games as men. In fact, I know women who would be shocked if the label "gamer" was applied to them, despite them spending more time playing "video games" than I play. To them, Borderland, Skyrim, and other titles more likely to be represented at E3 are "video games" and what they play are not video games.
The second says women make up 46% of the most frequent game buyers. I know that I buy a hell of a lot more games for my mobile device than I buy for my PC, because the games are so much less expensive on my mobile device and I always have my mobile device with me. I also know that when I buy a game it is sometimes a gift, or a game for my kid. How does my purchase reflect *me* as the target audience? It doesn't. To put some context on this: even though I've spent WAY more time playing Civilization V, I only purchased it once, versus the many, many purchases I've spent LESS time playing on my phone. Using your logic this would make me more of a "mobile gamer" than a "PC gamer", but the opposite is actually true.
In short, both these statistics are absolutely meaningless in this context. Women don't make up even close to half of the market for the games and systems at E3.
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:5, Insightful)
Because, while most men are respectable individuals - Family men, husbands, boyfriends, parents - We're also about 1% away from being sexually-driven monkeys.
Maybe you are. The fact that you sometimes, or even often, want sex, doesn't make you a "sexually-driven monkey"... not anymore than when I look at a guy and then fantasize about the size of his cock means I'm about to just spazz out, rip off his clothes, and scream "Fuck me now, man-beast!" But I'll fantasize about it.
The thing is, everybody is like this -- only our social expectations differ. If you walked up and grabbed my ass, you'd get slapped with sexual harassment and everyone would publicly denounce you. But privately, you and I both know, there'd be elbow ripping and some "Yeah, we understand." On the other hand, if I walk up and grab your crotch and suck on my lip, you're not going to file for sexual harassment, you're going to follow me to the bathroom and fuck me silly.
Same desires. Different roles.
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:4, Insightful)
Geez, what's the problem. Gaming is *still* according to the numbers, a male dominated interests, what is wrong with catering to your main audience? No matter how old a (straight) guy is, he is never going to get tired of looking at scantily clad women. Doesn't matter if your 13 or 63, we still like looking at tight, cute asses.
Not everything has to conform to political correctness. What's wrong with letting guys be guys, and enjoy things men like?
When the women outnumber the men, are we going to complain then that there are too many booth bros?
you can start by not being sexist to men (Score:5, Insightful)
So much of what I see here at E3 is aimed directly at the lizard hindbrain of a 13-year-old boy.
Is that some new, clever, more-polite way of saying "aimed at men, who think with their dicks?" 1)Men don't think about sex any more than women do. 2)Men are not interested in promiscuous sex, by and large. 3)Men are not only interested in sex, either. 4)We have agency, and that agency is not controlled any more by our dicks than your agency is controlled by your vagina, thank you very much.
All of the above has been proven with research and studies, which stand in stark face to the crap that just falls out of the mouth of many a feminist in the same breath as complaints about sexism. It's perfectly acceptable to say men think with their genitals and to call them pigs for being interested in sex while calling women interested in sex "empowered." Female nudity is celebrated; male nudity is controversial and rarely if ever portrayed or shown. We're told that women's sexual feature are beautiful, and men's genitals are gross, disgusting, etc.
Furthermore, I am not responsible for content or marketing aimed at my demographic any more than women would be held responsible for content or marketing aimed at them. This is particularly true given that any time this subject comes up with other men, the responses are that it is: cheesy, annoying, eye-roll inducing, and in many cases, not what any of us consider attractive. I don't find blonds with giant breasts to be attractive. Sorry. Don't. Tell that to a bunch of women on a "sexism in the game industry" panel and the response will be some strong variant of "You don't know what you're talking about." Actually, we fuckin' well do. We know better than you are. But it's not convenient to your little rant; what's convenient is to portray us all as drooling over booth babes with hard dicks.
You want equality? Great. So do we. Stop insulting us. Stop repeating sexist, made up bullshit. Stop dismissing us when we tell you you're wrong about prevailing attitudes.
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:4, Insightful)
I'll do that, but I have to warn you that if the "hostility" is similar to what's found at atheist conferences (elevator-gate) or developer's conferences (dongle-gate) I'm not exactly going to be horrified.
Re: doesn't help people take games seriously eithe (Score:2, Insightful)
Why would I want to hit on every busty 20-year-old? Attraction among advanced creatures like humans is based on considerably more than mere first-physical-sight. There are women I'm attracted to and those I'm not, and this is not usually based on randomly pointing to people I pass on the street...
So you're just full of shit and you think the white knight routine will get you laid. Gotcha.
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course not. Racism is about hatred for inherent qualities. Appreciating a sexy person isn't. You're utterly bewildered.
Mr. Hanky... I hate to be the one to break it to you, but those of us who admire the sexual presence, poise and potential of women in general don't hate women.
To suggest that we do... that's not very insightful, fella.
I will say that the nonsense spewed by those of you who think that the joyous and interested participation in the roles of the sexes should be categorized as misogyny -- the hatred of women -- should be a lot less widely accepted.
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:4, Insightful)
Ah, so you think men are all objects too? We can only respond in the ways your sexist stereotypes dictate?
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm a man with advanced features like "a brain" and "thought processes"
Me too, except we both don't have enough blood to run that and the other attachment at the same time. (apologies to Robin Williams).
But seriously, for the same reason I don't normally stick my face in the punch bowl at a party, I don't normally crawl under the table a stick my head up someones dress. The 'sins' of lust and gluttony are the same thing, and society will always be outraged and self-righteous about both.
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:1, Insightful)
How is this insightful?!
Yeah! Nothing wrong with using women for the sole purpose of being stared at like the objects they're showing off. ... really?
For crying out loud, women are not blow up dolls to be paraded around like show animals.
Now, let me get this straight, I don't doubt for a second any of these women are anything less than professional and may even enjoy their job. That's fine, I'm not going to hold somebody's job against them and I certainly don't expect every woman to be a feminist.
But, in general as a society, we can respect women enough that we don't have to use them as sex objects and walking billboards. As a man, you should hold yourself to a better standard of creature than one driven by his carnal instincts. Nobody likes being leered at, so why would you condone it anywhere?
They're all there because they want to be. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:5, Insightful)
First, I take exception to this remark. I'm a 38-year-old straight guy (I find women WAY more attractive than men), but this sort of transparent ploy just seems pathetic to me. It is not a turn-on to see women desperately flirting with me when I know all they want is for me to buy their product. People like to talk about sexism towards men: THAT Is sexism towards men. "Oh, put a sexy lady in front of him and he'll do anything we tell him to." Ugh.
Second, did you see the numbers above? "45 percent of the entire gaming population is now women, and women make up 46 percent of the most frequent game buyers." It is *not* a male-dominated industry any more.
(I'm not even going to get into the use of women as decorative objects because someone who complains about "political correctness" isn't going to see anything wrong with that anyway, I figure.)
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:5, Insightful)
Is it wrong to have the rest of the booth personnel there? After all, they are simply objects with the sole purpose of showing off corporate propaganda? Or barristas, living coffee machines? Or any other employee?
In fact, that's pretty much the definition of business - a setting where other people are primarily valued based on what you can get from them. "Nothing personal, just business." Why does this suddenly stop being okay when "what you can get" is sex appeal? Sure, it means that their abilities are likely under-utilized, but so are burger flipper's. Is this simply a continuation of the general "sex is sinful" -meme that still plagues the US?
We obviously do, as plenty of women are employed outside these professions. The issue is whether any can be hired for them.
All beings are driven by their instincts, that's their purpose. Why single out "carnal" instincts? Because sex is a sin?
That is obviously untrue, as people of either gender often go out of their way to appear attractive.
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, i mean it's like gaming is the only area where nice looking young women are there to promote something. In contrast to... let's say cheerleading... which is only to be seen as an artist sport event where football happens at the side, and great care was taken by the costume designers to hide away the womens bodies appropriatly.
Re:doesn't help people take games seriously either (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, but I also hear people (mostly women) bitch about strip clubs, even though that's the exact same context as a Chippendale gig.