Sexism in the Witcher Series [SPOILERS]

+
In that case skimpy clothes are also not sexist if those who wear it does not consider it sexist. The problem is there is a lot more woman that are forced to wear burka than those forced to wear skimpy clothes, at least if we don't count pathological, criminal scenarios that are not accepted by society.
May I ask why you keep bringing up burka in this discussion ?
In most countries that women are required to wear burka, men also are required by law to wear certain clothing and avoid wearing certain clothing. For example men are required to wear keffiyeh or turban and cannot wear shorts and short sleeved shirts in a number of countries. So this issue is not based on sex, it is simply the lack of freedom and government dictatorship. Please don't try to make it about sexism based on stereotypes. Burka was not created by a bunch of evil men trying to control women.
Most Middle Eastern clothing including men's keffiyeh and women's burka covered the face and skin to protect them form the sun and sand and dirt. Majority of Middle East has hot and dry weather with burning sun shining all day, and the ground is composed of flat surfaces such as deserts that do not provide shading. People did not have access to sunscreen back in the day, so they used clothing to protect their skin from sunburns and that's how burka and keffiyeh got created. They also made breathing easier and protected people form sand and dirt, since sand and dirt got kicked up in the air because of the dry weather and wind. In worst case scenarios, they protected people from sand storms. So burka was not created to impose sexism, and it was created long before Abrahamic religions including Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.
Unfortunately today some governments force women to wear burka and men to wear keffiyeh or turban and cover up their arms and legs for religious reasons, and it goes both ways in majority of cases. It is not a sexism issue that only targets women, it is simply a case of dictatorship and lack of freedom since men are also targeted.
And finally burka does not have anything to do with this discussion which is about sexism in Witcher games, and as far as I remember no one wore burka in Witcher 1 or 2 :)
 
In that case skimpy clothes are also not sexist if those who wear it does not consider it sexist. The problem is there is a lot more woman that are forced to wear burka than those forced to wear skimpy clothes, at least if we don't count pathological, criminal scenarios that are not accepted by society.

Really? get a job because your look (sexy look: dresses, hairstyle, weight and shape...) isn't a pressure in our society? If that doesn't happen in your country, congrats! When women sit down in a wait-room for an job interview they know in few seconds who from them will be chosen. CV stay in a lower level.
Be a woman, my friend!
 
Ok guys, please let's leave the burka\poltiic\religious subject NOW! It's off topic and it's a "dangerous" topic. Let's stick on feminism IN game please.
Thank you
 
Really? get a job because your look (sexy look: dresses, hairstyle, weight and shape...) isn't a pressure in our society? If that doesn't happen in your country, congrats! When women sit down in a wait-room for an job interview they know in few seconds who from them will be chosen. CV stay in a lower level.
Be a woman, my friend!

Would you hire me if i look like fat, bald stinky ex prisoner? I guess not. If you want job you need to look like someone that gets the job done, you also need qualifications, that applies to both genders. I don't know in what horrible place do you live where women are hired or only by the looks, not their qualifications. But yeah general appearance is important if you want job, it is NOT forced by law.
 
You kind of took the counter-example to the extreme, Sirnaq. I don't think wichat wrote about a situation where four women are in physical neglect and only the fifth is the saint who bothers to use shampoo. I'm assuming she meant that more often than not, as long as there's no gross gap in the qualifications, the pretty woman will enjoy a very generous advantage from the outset. A (subconscious?) consideration that usually doesn't weigh in when hiring men, or not as heavily.
 
After a few moderator requests to stay on topic, this is the last one. Colour red meaning any further derailing will result in a lock.
 
Last edited:
Would you hire me if i look like fat, bald stinky ex prisoner? I guess not. If you want job you need to look like someone that gets the job done, you also need qualifications, that applies to both genders. I don't know in what horrible place do you live where women are hired or only by the looks, not their qualifications. But yeah general appearance is important if you want job, it is NOT forced by law.
the hypocrisy of democracy is that the pressure is not by wroten law but by non-wroten law or rules. Enter in a food shop and you will see more and more products of diets absoluty useless, but the message is there: be thin, be beautyfull and SHOW your body, if you can show your body you're not good for this society. Enter in a dress shop and you will not find a size that will fit you if you are over the stereotypes walkway, needo to find a "second level shop" that makes you feel inside out of the pattern of acceptable. And so on and so on and so on and so on and so on

Pressure for default or excess is just the same (don't talk about anoexias and bulimia, and aside suicides): I ought to do with my body/image what regims/lobbies want.
I repeat, be a woman my friend!

After a few moderator requests to stay on topic, this is the last one. Colour red meaning any further derailing will result in a lock.

Sorry, I've not read it believing it was just another post deleted.
Delete mine if you consider it is the right way, but don't punish the rest of the user locking this thread by my fault. Sorry.
 
Last edited:
We could debate this topic for days, but seeing that mods are losing patience i will stop now. I just want to make it clear that i do not agree and do not share your outlook witchat.

At least, (i hope) we can agree that witcher games are not sexist and this thread is pointless at this point anyway.
 
Last edited:
Yes, it's not the case to continue. I know that you want to discuss this subject, I know that you are all very sensitive about it and it's ok. But Please...

NOT HERE!

You can do in private if you want. Please, understand, we don't want to shut your mouth. Just that it's difficult to moderate such a slippery ground and it may eventually end in a flamewar sooner or later. Thank you for your patience.
 
I'm a girl and I don't find the game sexist. Yes, there are themes of sexism, but that's historically accurate. Just because you show human weakness or sexuality in a woman doesn't make it suddenly sexist - how many redeemable men do you actually meet in the Witcher? More than half lie, cheat, steal, kill, or are just plain rude to you. Is that now a man-bash-fest?

Triss and Ves and Cynthia and Philips and Saskia; all very strong, driven characters who play a large role in the plot. So what, they have flaws that maybe aren't flattering? If they made a perfect woman in a game, she would be unrealistic and people would likely start complaining about how her perfection is a comment on how "flawed" men are.
 
I can describe a game that would be sexist. It is a game where all women are presented according to traditional stereotypes of being intrinsically inferior, and not capable of playing any important role. So a sexist game is any game where all women are either good wives and mothers, nice maidens, nuns, hookers, or damsels in distress. A lot of them require help, sometimes they may provide food, shelter, medical treatment, and some info, but they do not play any active role in a story.

The Witcher 2 is as far from this as any game can possible be, with the powerful women actually being the major driving force of the plot, for better or for worse. Often the powerful men simply react to the situation created by these women, and whatever the ending you get, the entire North has changed because of their actions. I can't really imagine why anyone would call TW2 sexist, unless they do not frigging understand what "sexist" really means.
 
I can describe a game that would be sexist. It is a game where all women are presented according to traditional stereotypes of being intrinsically inferior, and not capable of playing any important role. So a sexist game is any game where all women are either good wives and mothers, nice maidens, nuns, hookers, or damsels in distress. A lot of them require help, sometimes they may provide food, shelter, medical treatment, and some info, but they do not play any active role in a story.

Even that game I would hesitate to call sexist, as it might simply portray an era where humanity simply considered such behaviour normal.

In my opinion calling a game sexist translates to calling the developers sexist since they are the ones who made it.
And generally speaking the amount of people that are not sexists, outweigh by far the amount of people that are, so statistically, you can't have a whole studio that is sexist.

What I'm trying to say is, that it seems to me that people confuse sexism with the effort of telling a "realistic" story.
 
Even that game I would hesitate to call sexist, as it might simply portray an era where humanity simply considered such behaviour normal.

You know, even in real history, during every historical period, women have been never completely subjugated. A lot of heresies appeared, and witch-hunts were a regular affair in every country because there were always women who did not confirm. So even a game in realistic Middle Ages settings could include some women as active characters, without going into feminist anachronisms, or inventing new Jeanna D'Arc. Just because not too many women charged into battle in full plate it does not mean that women did not play any major role. Some ruled their lands when their menfolk was crusading, or as regents for their young sons. Even a realistic setting is not an excuse, I would say.
 
You know, even in real history, during every historical period, women have been never completely subjugated. A lot of heresies appeared, and witch-hunts were a regular affair in every country because there were always women who did not confirm. So even a game in realistic Middle Ages settings could include some women as active characters, without going into feminist anachronisms, or inventing new Jeanna D'Arc. Just because not too many women charged into battle in full plate it does not mean that women did not play any major role. Some ruled their lands when their menfolk was crusading, or as regents for their young sons. Even a realistic setting is not an excuse, I would say.

Indeed you are right here, but the example is a bit stretched (which was done intentionally by you to make a point).
My point was further down in my post, I guess I wasn't that clear though, and it referred to the developers "called" (though nobody actually called them that) sexist, as a result of certain sexist behaviours in the game that they made. That's how I percieve it at least..
 
@StaGiors

(Sorry, I can't quote your posts directly, the forum is being weird right now.)

I think you hit the nail on the head, here. Quite frankly I am not engaging in this thread because the OP made it unclear what they had a problem with in the first place. There is a huge difference between portraying a sexist world and the developers themselves imposing their views on purpose (which, in my opinion, CDPR does a good job not doing). This applies to a variety of 'heavier' issues represented in the game, and they often approach more than one side depending on your choice. The whole ordeal with Loredo comes to mind, in particular.
 
@Dona

Loredo's example is great in this situation, one can clearly see CDPR's opinion towards the character by just playing through the different choices for his fate..

P.S. I wonder why Loredo always survives at my playthroughs..I must be a chauvinist pig :p
P.P.S. How unfortunate for Chauvin that we use his name in this context..I wonder how that happened o.o

Well since I can't edit I guess i will double post, just to admit my ignorance of the true meaning of the word chauvinism
I didn't quite realize it was excessive patriotism :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
LOL I let Loredo live in my Iorveth playthroughs, I just cannot let the poor elven girls die (all the while side-eyeing Iorveth for sitting on his ass to ~prove a point~. Asshole.) Admittedly, that choice becomes harder with each playthrough because I know what's in Loredo's mansion. Ugh.
 
LOL I let Loredo live in my Iorveth playthroughs, I just cannot let the poor elven girls die (all the while side-eyeing Iorveth for sitting on his ass to ~prove a point~. Asshole.) Admittedly, that choice becomes harder with each playthrough because I know what's in Loredo's mansion. Ugh.

Same thing here, however my problem is some choices before, mainly when I am to decide whether to give Iorveth his sword or not..
This has to be the most difficult choice in the game, still not sure what "canon" Geralt would do..

And we are way off topic so I'm going to shut it :p
 
The fact that so many female gamers have said so many times that they consider the Witcher sexist, while games like Tomb Rider or anything by Bioware are empowering to them, should be enough of a clue that something's wrong with the portrayal of female characters in the witcher games, which isn't there in some other games, even if it's hard to pinpoint what that is, precisely.

As much as I love the games, I can't help but notice a certain pattern in the portrayal of male characters, compared to female characters, which I don't like very much. The problem isn't with them being sexual or discriminated against in their society, but in the role they play in the plot and how it compares to that played by male characters.

When male protagonists suffer, they do so in a way that makes them look impressive and tough, not pitful and humiliated (compare Geralt's torture in the prologue with that of Mary Luise La Valette). When they die, they die a noble, respectable death (compare Aryan La Valette's death, or Cedric's death, to that of any of the female characters in the game)). When they're wronged in some way, they take a bloody revenge (compare Roche, or Geralt, to Ves). Male characters are not only capable of protecting themselves just fine, but also able to protect others (compare any of the male protagonists in the witcher to any of the female protagonists). With the exception of villainesses, male characters actively drive the plot. Female characters don't act, they react. For majority of the game, plot happens as a result of Geralt, Roche, Iorveth and Letho's actions. Female characters are either incapacitated in some way for large parts of the game, or stand aside, waiting for male characters to do something they can react to. With Triss kidnapped, Ves raped and gone, and Saskia poisoned, while none of the male characters got the same treatment, I had the impression that the reason for this was that the writers just didn't know what to do with female characters and looked for ideas to quietly remove them from the plot.
 
So let's see Philippa makes nations dance to her tune, her lodge is successfully seizing the north.
Saskia has defeated a nation and is raising a new one.
Cynthia, outwitted one of the sharpest minds in the north.
Louisa LaValette, raised a revolt against one of the most beloved kings to ever rule Temeria.
These are not empowering but a spoiled rich girl psycopath is, along with the women of Bioware who are unmotivated idiots who serve others slavishly for years at a time, for no pay and while being incompetent at their own jobs. Yeah really makes sense.

Noble deaths of men in the Witcher, let's see Foltest gagging on his own blood with a slit throat, so noble and empowering.
Cedric holding his guts in as he drags himself into the forest, very respectable.
Aryan LaValette chopped apart by the Witcher, death don't get any better than massive gaping wounds.
Roche fleeing Loc Muinne without country, master or direction, hopeful and inspirational.
Iorveth bleeding to death among tormenting Dhoinne, so respectful of his condition.
Letho killed by a fellow Witcher, whom he helped at great cost, so just he must think as the stomach wound slowly tortures him into death.
All the men and boys wading through teh piss and shit at the sieges of Vergen and LaValette, getting hacked apart or roasted in oil, what a way to go

Yep that makes total fucking sense .
 
Top Bottom