|
What I've been saying is pure conjecture so whether or not my statements hold any credence doesn't really matter because the amount of research done on sexual objectifications and its effects have been dismal up until this point. There's still a lot of academic bias in multiple studies on this topic for numerous reasons. One egregious example is that many of said studies don't put any effort in studying the effects of sexual objectification in the case of homosexual men and women. The counter studies that have looked into this problem found really interesting results that desperately require more research. It's my biggest issue with sexual objectification research, there's not enough exploration of the topic outside of "Do heterosexual women feel bad when a skinny model is in an advertisement? Find out tonight!"
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 18:58 |
|
|
natetimm posted:Nobody is marginalized or oppressed by imaginary things in fantasy land and the idea that your personal taste in fiction can somehow make you morally superior is laughably elitist and dumb. So if someone just really loves Triumph of the Will, The Turner Diaries, Hunter, Birth of a Nation. Clive Cussler, The Camp of the Saints, and the Last Confederate Flag, you don't think that says anything about the person or has any impact on them?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:10
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:So if someone just really loves Triumph of the Will, The Turner Diaries, Hunter, Birth of a Nation. Clive Cussler, The Camp of the Saints, and the Last Confederate Flag, you don't think that says anything about the person or has any impact on them? I think that person likes those things because of their already existing mentality, not the other way around. The fact that they like them isn't what makes the morally repugnant or incorrect, it's the underlying value system that was laid in place before they were even able to consume those things properly or comprehend them, and how they allow that value system to impact their interactions with other people and the world at large. People generally gravitate to fiction with themes and ideas they already like and feel comfortable with.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:I don't think that porn does have any effect on attitudes towards women, and I'm not sure why you're talking about porn in the first place. Do you think porn is more sexist than other parts of our culture? I linked directly to other studies but whatever. The second thing is porn, sexualized depictions of women, and violence in media have no effect on behavior towards other or personal beliefs is actually important to how we frame a debate or discussion on women characters in video games. You have do more than Tezzor's weak rear end and continued "But it was built by men to appeal to men!" and actually examine the context and manner in how it's done.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:14
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:I didn't claim these were all about media effects, though. The first is about symbolic racism--the likelihood that believing in racist stereotypes about people actually affects attitudes towards those people. The second is, indeed, a short term priming effect, but we live in a society where sexist messages are absolutely constant. The third is about the effect of a different cultural milieu, one of anti-racism. But we are talking about media effects right now, so why do you bring up a bunch of other stuff? Obdicut posted:Because sexism is an attitude and violence is an action? Again, this seems like total common sense to me. I'm talking about attitudes towards violence. People who are exposed to violence in real life are way more desensitized to violence than people who have only been exposed to violence in the movies and video games. That would seem to be a contrary data point. Obdicut posted:They're not testing emotions, though, they're testing attitude. Mixing up the two might be the source of your confusion. I fail to see a meaningful difference. If anything, you'd think attitudes would be quite a bit harder to change. Obdicut posted:Again, the perfect common-sense idea is that if you're exposed to pervasive racism, sexism, etc, then you'll tend to have those values. This explains the incredibly easily observable empirical fact that people who grow up in racist households tend to have more racist attitudes than then those who do not. It explains racist attitudes in those who have incredibly limited encounters with the other race, and only perceive them through media. It is completely common-sense, the main academic point of argument is the way in which this functions and the extent to which individual representations have an effect. There is almost nobody who denies that a racist environment normalizes racism. Do you? If you mean a racist environment as in growing up in a household where your parents frequently make explicitly racist statements in front of you, then yes. If you mean a fictional character, who is probably a bad guy, making racist comments in a movie, as seen by someone over the age of 13 then I'm going to want to take a closer look. Oh, and science has proven time and time again that sometimes common sense is wrong. It made perfect sense that the Earth stayed in one place while the planets and sun revolved around it. After all, if you ride a chariot around a track, you'll constantly feel a sense of acceleration, the wind against your face, etc. It's obvious that if the Earth was constantly zipping around the sun at a far greater speed, you would feel those sensations all the time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:15
|
|
|
It should be noted in those sexist joke studies, it explicitly mentioned framing a sexist joke as incorrect before hand doesn't ding up a high scoring sexist person's points either and renders no effect. So having sexist dialgoue repeated out of the mouth of an unsympathetic mouth piece might be actually have the opposite effect. It's be an interesting study to see if that's the case.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:18
|
|
|
natetimm posted:Nobody is marginalized or oppressed by imaginary things in fantasy land and the idea that your personal taste in fiction can somehow make you morally superior is laughably elitist and dumb. Incorrect. 1. For one thing, formation of role models is an important part of adolescence. Many minorities complain about the lack of positive role models who have the same skin color, or the lack of positive role models for girls. This is a complain rarely made by white, male children. Which of the following is a more like scenario: a) The lack of role models the same race/gender as children is problematic by the testimony of minorities and women, and white men (not necessarily speaking of you, btw, as I do not know your gender or race) who complain about them are wrong about it not mattering, since it's a problem they do not encounter. b) All of the complainers are just whiners who are complaining about fake problems, and despite not encountering the problem white men are better judges of this issue than those who actually experience the problem. 2. White people who grow up in communities without exposure to blacks tend to hold more racist views. The majority of their exposure to blacks is through media and art. If they encounter more negative portrayals than positive portrayals, would that not have an affect on their perception of the race as a whole, since they have little contact with members of that race in the first place?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:22
|
|
|
NutritiousSnack posted:A mild bad thing compared to what the hell is causing a high score on hostile sexism that isn't going to effect what's already is going to be bad long term behavior.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:22
|
|
|
natetimm posted:I think that person likes those things because of their already existing mentality, not the other way around. The fact that they like them isn't what makes the morally repugnant or incorrect, it's the underlying value system that was laid in place before they were even able to consume those things properly or comprehend them, and how they allow that value system to impact their interactions with other people and the world at large. People generally gravitate to fiction with themes and ideas they already like and feel comfortable with. how did they arrive at that value system? It doesn't have to be one or the other. The general idea would be that you seek out things that reinforce your value system, but you do have to account for where the system comes from, as well, especially in areas where the person has zero interaction with people of that race. INH5 posted:But we are talking about media effects right now, so why do you bring up a bunch of other stuff? All of them are obviously related to media effects, and what I was talking about was being in a cultural mileu, all of those are relevant to that? I'm not even understanding your objection, here. quote:I'm talking about attitudes towards violence. People who are exposed to violence in real life are way more desensitized to violence than people who have only been exposed to violence in the movies and video games. That would seem to be a contrary data point. Do you understand that violence is an action and not an attitude? This isn't a contrary data point in the least, and again, I don't have any idea why you think it is. Even if we went ahead and treated 'violence' like it was the same as 'sexism', then the corollary would be seeing actual sexism is way more powerful than media representations of sexism, which is probably true. quote:I fail to see a meaningful difference. If anything, you'd think attitudes would be quite a bit harder to change. You think it would be harder to make someone change their attitude than hit would be to change someone's behavior? Why? quote:If you mean a racist environment as in growing up in a household where your parents frequently make explicitly racist statements in front of you, then yes. If you mean a fictional character, who is probably a bad guy, making racist comments in a movie, as seen by someone over the age of 13 then I'm going to want to take a closer look. No, I mean a fictional character who is the hero making racist comments. But focus on the parents bit. Imagine it's not your parents, but your friends and coworkers. Still think it has an effect? quote:Oh, and science has proven time and time again that sometimes common sense is wrong. It made perfect sense that the Earth stayed in one place while the planets and sun revolved around it. After all, if you ride a chariot around a track, you'll constantly feel a sense of acceleration, the wind against your face, etc. It's obvious that if the Earth was constantly zipping around the sun at a far greater speed, you would feel those sensations all the time. We're not talking about science, though, we're talking about the experience of being a human being, which we all share. All of us should know, unless we're super-weird, that the ideas and attitudes we grew up being exposed to had an effect on us. Denying this just seems egregiously strange to me. NutritiousSnack posted:I linked directly to other studies but whatever. You're confusing a lot of different things here. My basic premise is that exposure to sexist attitudes influences people to accept sexism as normal, just as exposure to racist attitudes influences people to accept racism as normal. If you see depictions of black people as dumb, violent, and uncreative, then that will tend to affect your view of black people. If you see depictions of women as highly emotional, less capable than men, and foolish, then that will tend to affect your view of women. Do you actually disagree with this, and if so, how do you think the sexist and racist attitudes in our society propagate?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:23
|
|
|
Not an Owl posted:Incorrect. If you are getting your role models from fictional characters, you have problems. Again, we are talking about fantasy land, not reality.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:25
|
|
|
NutritiousSnack posted:The second thing is porn, sexualized depictions of women, and violence in media have no effect on behavior towards other or personal beliefs is actually important to how we frame a debate or discussion on women characters in video games. Men aren't affected, but women are very much affected by said depictions. Media perpetuates it, media does not establish it, it is socialization that leads to the teaching of internalizing media. What are you not getting here?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:26
|
|
|
Not an Owl posted:a) The lack of role models the same race/gender as children is problematic by the testimony of minorities and women, and white men (not necessarily speaking of you, btw, as I do not know your gender or race) who complain about them are wrong about it not mattering, since it's a problem they do not encounter. What you describe as the arguement of white men there is always hilarious to me. If you have women and minorities saying that a lack of such fictional role models matters to them, and you have a bunch of white men saying "I don't get it, it doesn't matter to me", then isn't the simple solution just to include more women and minorities? It matters to them, it supposedly doesn't matter to white men, so how about we just do it? If the white men are genuine about it not mattering, then they won't miss the representation, and the part of the audience who it matters to gets better representation. Win/win, right? It's almost as if "it doesn't matter to me" is a false argument.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:26
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:how did they arrive at that value system? Most people's value systems are put into place by the people around them in their environment. If you are a child getting your value system from fictional places and characters, you are probably being neglected, and that's the issue at hand, not the fact that you can see a titty in The Witcher 3.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:26
|
|
|
natetimm posted:If you are getting your role models from fictional characters, you have problems. Again, we are talking about fantasy land, not reality. What about literal children? To which many games are marketed towards?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:28
|
|
|
natetimm posted:If you are getting your role models from fictional characters, you have problems. Again, we are talking about fantasy land, not reality.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:28
|
|
|
Not an Owl posted:What about literal children? To which many games are marketed towards? Even literal children know the difference from fantasy and reality. It's good the left are getting to the "think of the children" portion of their moral panic, though. Totally not something we've seen before.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:29
|
|
|
thefncrow posted:What you describe as the arguement of white men there is always hilarious to me. Because "all censorship is wrong" 
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:29
|
|
|
natetimm posted:Most people's value systems are put into place by the people around them in their environment. If you are a child getting your value system from fictional places and characters, you are probably being neglected, and that's the issue at hand, not the fact that you can see a titty in The Witcher 3. While it's very true that it's rare for someone to eschew the value system that they are being brought up with if they have attentive parents who are giving them good values, the truth is a lot of people are 'neglected' and are influenced by things other than their parents. Even with very attentive parents, people are still influenced by other things. In addition, peer association has a huge amount to do with the way that we socialize; this peer association includes consuming media based on what other people say is good or think is good. in addition, there are non-fictional racist works, like The Bell Curve, the portrayals of black people in the news, and stuff like that to consider. thefncrow posted:What you describe as the arguement of white men there is always hilarious to me. That's nicely put. natetimm posted:Even literal children know the difference from fantasy and reality. It's good the left are getting to the "think of the children" portion of their moral panic, though. Totally not something we've seen before. As others have persuasively argued, just because you know something is fictional doesn't mean you don't emotionally respond to it. We feel sympathy towards fictional characters, we 'want' 'them' to succeed or fail, etc., even while we know they're not real.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:31
|
|
|
Think of the children who will have no black role models in a game set in fairy tale middle-age Poland! The argument is never about a lack of inclusiveness. Nobody is complaining about new IPs with minority characters. The complaints revolve around the inquisition on games whose setting fails to meet that arbitrary standard because somehow a new type of progressive homogeneity is better than an old kind of homogeneity.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:32
|
|
|
natetimm posted:Nobody is complaining about new IPs with minority characters. Mostly because they don't exist.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:33
|
|
|
Not an Owl posted:Incorrect. Are you distinguishing between real life role models and fictional role models? In fact, hasn't entertainment aimed at children gone to great lengths to have a diverse range of characters in the past few decades? Not an Owl posted:2. White people who grow up in communities without exposure to blacks tend to hold more racist views. The majority of their exposure to blacks is through media and art. If they encounter more negative portrayals than positive portrayals, would that not have an affect on their perception of the race as a whole, since they have little contact with members of that race in the first place? Actually, I'd think that the majority of their exposure to blacks would be in the news, that is things that actually happened in real life even if they didn't happen near the person. There are also the factors of influence by parents and peers, and white people who grow up in communities without exposure to blacks will be more likely to live in rural areas and be less educated. Obdicut posted:Do you understand that violence is an action and not an attitude? This isn't a contrary data point in the least, and again, I don't have any idea why you think it is. Even if we went ahead and treated 'violence' like it was the same as 'sexism', then the corollary would be seeing actual sexism is way more powerful than media representations of sexism, which is probably true. Again, I mean attitudes towards violence, not your likelihood to commit violence. Did you miss the part where I said "desensitized"? Obdicut posted:You think it would be harder to make someone change their attitude than hit would be to change someone's behavior? Why? I was contrasting attitudes with emotions. Obdicut posted:You're confusing a lot of different things here. My basic premise is that exposure to sexist attitudes influences people to accept sexism as normal, just as exposure to racist attitudes influences people to accept racism as normal. If you see depictions of black people as dumb, violent, and uncreative, then that will tend to affect your view of black people. If you see depictions of women as highly emotional, less capable than men, and foolish, then that will tend to affect your view of women. Through the attitudes of parents and peers, as well as explicit propaganda (that is, lies labeled as truth).
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:33
|
|
|
natetimm posted:Think of the children who will have no black role models in a game set in fairy tale middle-age Poland! Magic in video games set in fantasy middle-age Poland: "yeah sure why not" Black people in video games set in fantasy middle-age Poland: "UNREALISTIC DOES NOT CONFORM TO REALITY"
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:34
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Mostly because they don't exist. This would probably have been accurate in 1998.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:34
|
|
|
natetimm posted:This would probably have been accurate in 1998. And today?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:35
|
|
|
Not an Owl posted:Magic in video games set in fantasy middle-age Poland: "yeah sure why not" The ever famous "why can't your fantasy be my fantasy" complaint. Nothing stopping you from making that fantasy come true, buddy. Well, except effort exceeding ineffectual and pointless bitching, that is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:35
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:A fictional character, by definition, can't be 'fully developed'. They can be well-developed, but they remain fictional and there are aspects of their character that are not explicit, and moreover the character remains something being created by the author and interpreted by the reader. Fictional characters resemble real people, but they aren't real people. They're not 'automatons', but they are creations. Where did I ever imply that "fully developed" meant 'non-fictional'? Of course they aren't real people. I never claimed that. I claimed that the ways we respond to fictional creations resembles, in some sense, how we respond to real life standards. We judge the morality of fictional characters actions along the same sort of lines as we judge the morality of the actions of real people By 'fully developed' I essentially meant skillfully done, "good" characters. In any sense, it really is entirely possible for a fictional character to flaunt her sexuality, and use it as a sign of empowerment. Is this a default position? Of course not, and anyone who seriously believes that is grossly mistaken. But it is possible to do. I just don't understand the kneejerk reaction to sexualized characters in and of themselves. For instance, people complained about Sorceress from Dragon's Crown, the same game that features an atypically muscled female character and other exaggerated characters. Likewise, people complained about Quiet from MSGV based solely on her outfit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:36
|
|
|
The endless comparisons to 80s moral panics reveal a kind of naivete: this is merely the liberal Left going astray, down the path of rightist moral panics (the idea that left-leaning liberals are just now getting into moral panics is of course ridiculous). This of course ignores the actual lesson to be learned here: that the leftist and rightists strains of liberalism share fundamental goals: the idea: the need to distance oneself from the wrong, so that society can function. This is course the basic message of liberalism, that a social contract will push away all those nasty things. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 00:38 on Jul 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:36
|
|
|
computer parts posted:And today? Today every journalistic outlet is beating their meat ragged over how inclusive E3 is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:36
|
|
|
natetimm posted:If you are getting your role models from fictional characters, you have problems. Again, we are talking about fantasy land, not reality. natetimm posted:Even literal children know the difference from fantasy and reality. It's good the left are getting to the "think of the children" portion of their moral panic, though. Totally not something we've seen before. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:36
|
|
|
natetimm posted:Today every journalistic outlet is beating their meat ragged over how inclusive E3 is. And what new IPs demonstrate this inclusiveness?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:36
|
|
|
Not an Owl posted:Magic in video games set in fantasy middle-age Poland: "yeah sure why not"
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:37
|
|
|
INH5 posted:Again, I mean attitudes towards violence, not your likelihood to commit violence. Did you miss the part where I said "desensitized"? Desensitized isn't about an attitude toward violence, it's an emotional response towards violence. I'm sorry, but I think we're really off-track here. Violence is, for reasons I've already said, not really applicable. Violence is not an attitude in the same way sexism is. Sexism, racism, etc. are attitudes towards people. An 'attitude towards violence' isn't an attitude towards a person. quote:I was contrasting attitudes with emotions. I'm sorry, but you've lost me on the distinction you're making here. quote:Through the attitudes of parents and peers, as well as explicit propaganda (that is, lies labeled as truth). Why not implicit propaganda, that is, media that portrays black people as evil, for example, like The Turner Diaries? Why not in works of fiction that portray women as less intelligent than men? Why do those have no power, in your estimation, even when treated as representing truth by parents or peers? Do you think people don't think of fiction as portraying reality?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:38
|
|
|
computer parts posted:And what new IPs demonstrate this inclusiveness? Jesus Christ, you're being intentionally obtuse. Go look at any of the E3 coverage where they're claiming the gaming industry is "sticking it to GG" with all their new protagonists.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
natetimm posted:Jesus Christ, you're being intentionally obtuse. Go look at any of the E3 coverage where they're claiming the gaming industry is "sticking it to GG" with all their new protagonists. So you can't give me a single new IP?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:40
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Desensitized isn't about an attitude toward violence, it's an emotional response towards violence. I'm sorry, but I think we're really off-track here. Violence is, for reasons I've already said, not really applicable. Violence is not an attitude in the same way sexism is. Sexism, racism, etc. are attitudes towards people. An 'attitude towards violence' isn't an attitude towards a person. People who truly believe fiction to represent reality are a small minority with mental problems. Most of the people who would see reality in that sort of fiction are getting affirmation of previously held beliefs, they aren't being programmed to believe it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:41
|
|
|
natetimm posted:Jesus Christ, you're being intentionally obtuse. Go look at any of the E3 coverage where they're claiming the gaming industry is "sticking it to GG" with all their new protagonists.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
dont make fun of tezzors condition Obdicut posted:Why not implicit propaganda, that is, media that portrays black people as evil, for example, like The Turner Diaries? Why not in works of fiction that portray women as less intelligent than men? Why do those have no power, in your estimation, even when treated as representing truth by parents or peers? Do you think people don't think of fiction as portraying reality? The key words being parents and peers. Did your folks never sit you down and tell you the explosions on the tv were staged?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
natetimm posted:The ever famous "why can't your fantasy be my fantasy" complaint. Nothing stopping you from making that fantasy come true, buddy. Well, except effort exceeding ineffectual and pointless bitching, that is. "Uggghhhh why are you making me think about black people? They aren't my fantasy."
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
computer parts posted:So you can't give me a single new IP? I could if I thought you were being remotely honest about the question. It's two clicks away. Go look for yourself.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 18:58 |
|
|
Not an Owl posted:"Uggghhhh why are you making me think about black people? They aren't my fantasy." What makes you think you're entitled to control what people think about in fantasy in the first place?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 00:43
|
|