- Status
HEY! Wait! AS a decrepit old woman as educated and old-fashioned, raised in a country where women were forbidden to make any steps without the signature of their husband or father, well into the second half of the twentieth century, expose:
I respect your point of view (although heavily with a vision, and understanding of the game wrong)
and after seven years playing and reading The Witcher Saga
I declare:
Ciriously, the misogeny is only on the gamer's eyes: those who guess the image of women are mistreated and those who can only see boops and weakness. Certainly not in CDPR's works. (except Saskia armour)
I respect your point of view (although heavily with a vision, and understanding of the game wrong)
and after seven years playing and reading The Witcher Saga
I declare:
Ciriously, the misogeny is only on the gamer's eyes: those who guess the image of women are mistreated and those who can only see boops and weakness. Certainly not in CDPR's works. (except Saskia armour)
Last edited:
Ciriously, the misogeny is only on the gamer's eyes: those who guess the image of women are mistreated and those who can only see boops and weakness. Certainly not in CDPR's works. (except Saskia armour)
...and those who look for misogeny will always find it, anywhere. Sabes ?
Popculture is always a mirror of society.
Last edited:
Woah. Speak to the poster's points, preferably with examples, and let's try not to digress into suggesting anyone pointing out a game has bad things in it should go out into the real world and change them. That's a biig hole to jump into.
It's a videogame forum - not Amnesty International.
Again, the Witcher series absolutely has misogynistic elements - that is to say, parts of the game, you'll see some pretty denigrating portrayals of the female side of the species. Those same elements, like prostitution and revealing sex scenes, are found in many forms of media deemed misogynistic. Porn, for example.
Question is, is the -game- and the -designers- discriminating against women in particular or is it a facet of the story they are trying to tell? It's always going to be a good question, in part because it encourages us to look at the honesty of art.
If you are taking your audience on a trip and some parts of that trip are uncomfortable or offensive, should you omit them? To what degree should you include them? Are your motivations as an artist relevant to the piece? Etc.
Also, this thread is going to be pretty similar to the Sarkeesian thread and any other, "Sexism!" threads that pop up. I do wonder if the poster was aware of that.
It's a videogame forum - not Amnesty International.
Again, the Witcher series absolutely has misogynistic elements - that is to say, parts of the game, you'll see some pretty denigrating portrayals of the female side of the species. Those same elements, like prostitution and revealing sex scenes, are found in many forms of media deemed misogynistic. Porn, for example.
Question is, is the -game- and the -designers- discriminating against women in particular or is it a facet of the story they are trying to tell? It's always going to be a good question, in part because it encourages us to look at the honesty of art.
If you are taking your audience on a trip and some parts of that trip are uncomfortable or offensive, should you omit them? To what degree should you include them? Are your motivations as an artist relevant to the piece? Etc.
Also, this thread is going to be pretty similar to the Sarkeesian thread and any other, "Sexism!" threads that pop up. I do wonder if the poster was aware of that.
Got to admit I was tempted to post this on a General Discussions thread, but I opted out.
Hitchens and his trademark brilliance.
Hitchens and his trademark brilliance.
Last edited:
Yeah I feel you. I really do.
The only thing I can say is that how women are treated in the games is a mean to an end, rather than an end in itself. It's supposed to paint a very unequal, sad, non-progressive picture in order to sell us the idea that this is what it was like to live during the, very aptly called, Dark Ages. That's not to say that there ain't any bad ass women who wield equally much, or sometimes even more, power than their male counter parts. But yeah, they're still sexed up. I agree, it's pretty messed up. But again, they're depicting a world that's based on a medieval society. Even then, if you were a chick, you probably had to be pretty in order to get anywhere in life.
I've always seen RED as merely reflecting society as it was back then. Not that they're making any kind of sociological statement on how shit should be today. But it's good. They're creating games that truly and unapologetically depict the awful circumstances that women found themselves in the medieval times. Because someone should give those poor women a voice. That's important. We need to remember how shit used to be in order to prevent it happening in the future. Bah, I'm starting to ramble. I'll shut up now.
The only thing I can say is that how women are treated in the games is a mean to an end, rather than an end in itself. It's supposed to paint a very unequal, sad, non-progressive picture in order to sell us the idea that this is what it was like to live during the, very aptly called, Dark Ages. That's not to say that there ain't any bad ass women who wield equally much, or sometimes even more, power than their male counter parts. But yeah, they're still sexed up. I agree, it's pretty messed up. But again, they're depicting a world that's based on a medieval society. Even then, if you were a chick, you probably had to be pretty in order to get anywhere in life.
I've always seen RED as merely reflecting society as it was back then. Not that they're making any kind of sociological statement on how shit should be today. But it's good. They're creating games that truly and unapologetically depict the awful circumstances that women found themselves in the medieval times. Because someone should give those poor women a voice. That's important. We need to remember how shit used to be in order to prevent it happening in the future. Bah, I'm starting to ramble. I'll shut up now.
Well yeah. Full frontal nudity was what I was after.
She always reminds me of the Dryad in King of Dragon Pass, one event you hear a rumour that your Carls have been performing the beast with two backs with a beautiful Dryad, you have to judge them as adultery is a great sin under Orlanthi law. A season or two later the guilty will "sprout" roots exploding from within them as they are torn apart and return to the earth. Pretty brutal.
Runequest you can't beat it.
:hatsoff:
Thank you, Foggy, you nailed it. What's more, this must be the society the game portrays, because the themes of the game and Geralt's character get their meaning from that society that treats everybody badly and women worst of all.
Geralt is a hero as hardboiled as the pickled eggs on a tavern bar: Chandler's Marlowe, Hammett's Continental Op -- the man who must walk the mean streets, every day in danger of losing his humanity to them, and acutely conscious of how much he has already lost and what he still has to lose. His heroism is not in saving the world, but in saving himself.
You cannot tell his story in an enlightened world of sexual equality and political correctness. Blue Eyes's "Thank you, witcher. For your... humanity" would have no meaning there.
EDIT: Somebody else reminded me I should eat my words on that last point. A story like that works a treat in a world like Stig Larsson's fictional Sweden: where progressiveness, political correctness, equality of women, things like that are mandated but are nothing more than a Potemkin village, behind which the inhumanity not only continues unabated but has taken over the system in order to make a pretense that monstrous crimes are the new good.
Last edited:
Two thoughts:
Geralt without pants would have been an improvement for TW2 (with smart camera angles I guess, cause too many people wouldn't want to see his primary reproductive organs).
Women using sexappeal and physical beauty to get their way (sorceresses for example) is at least as demeaning to men as it is supposidly objectifying women. Making men senseless dogs, that are trained to bark, when they are given the figurative bone is not that flattering really.
But I wouldn't even argue that it is a misrepresentation, it is probably true for most heterosexual men and probably for some other groups in part too, that physical female beauty can be very effective and I would argue rather than calling this an objectification of women it is a stupification of men (or probably both). It actually empowers some women to a ludicrous degree and even though I am not a historian, I am sure, that it was used a lot as a manipulation tool in the past.
Geralt without pants would have been an improvement for TW2 (with smart camera angles I guess, cause too many people wouldn't want to see his primary reproductive organs).
Women using sexappeal and physical beauty to get their way (sorceresses for example) is at least as demeaning to men as it is supposidly objectifying women. Making men senseless dogs, that are trained to bark, when they are given the figurative bone is not that flattering really.
But I wouldn't even argue that it is a misrepresentation, it is probably true for most heterosexual men and probably for some other groups in part too, that physical female beauty can be very effective and I would argue rather than calling this an objectification of women it is a stupification of men (or probably both). It actually empowers some women to a ludicrous degree and even though I am not a historian, I am sure, that it was used a lot as a manipulation tool in the past.
First, the title. How exactly the game discriminates against the women players? And it is not a fault of translation. What benefits/features women, who play the game, do not get, while men get it all??? It is not like women do not get all DLC, or miss some other content.
Second, I agree with Guy and Foggy. It reminds me of a recent post on yahoo when a documentary about white actors playing as blacks (long time ago, in USA) was banned in one of US schools, and the teacher was suspended, for promotion of racism. I have no idea what these idiots think racism is - some sort of an infections disease you can get just by looking or reading about real history? Isn't it one of the main points of studying history - not to repeat old mistakes?
The same with the world of the witcher. Sure, it is full of shit, but it pretty much shows how far we progressed from medieval times. Women were treated badly, as well as minorities, serves, prisoners of war, and any undesirables. Instead of ditching these historical realities because some people feel offended (go to a fucking shrink if you are), we should actually learn about it, may be just to feel good and grateful about our society and not a bitch every time we have some economic or personal seat-back. May be we simply should remember how it was in order to appreciate what we have now.
Second, I agree with Guy and Foggy. It reminds me of a recent post on yahoo when a documentary about white actors playing as blacks (long time ago, in USA) was banned in one of US schools, and the teacher was suspended, for promotion of racism. I have no idea what these idiots think racism is - some sort of an infections disease you can get just by looking or reading about real history? Isn't it one of the main points of studying history - not to repeat old mistakes?
The same with the world of the witcher. Sure, it is full of shit, but it pretty much shows how far we progressed from medieval times. Women were treated badly, as well as minorities, serves, prisoners of war, and any undesirables. Instead of ditching these historical realities because some people feel offended (go to a fucking shrink if you are), we should actually learn about it, may be just to feel good and grateful about our society and not a bitch every time we have some economic or personal seat-back. May be we simply should remember how it was in order to appreciate what we have now.
Yes, I always found this completely non-anachronistic outfit particularly evocative of the role of women in a late medieval society:
View attachment 4889
The very period-authentic fishnets are clearly symbolic of the patriarchal bondage women of the age were subjected to, while the exposed cleavage speaks to how truly vulnerable women were. I'm not sure if the fur trim means anything. I think it's actually just fur.
View attachment 4889
The very period-authentic fishnets are clearly symbolic of the patriarchal bondage women of the age were subjected to, while the exposed cleavage speaks to how truly vulnerable women were. I'm not sure if the fur trim means anything. I think it's actually just fur.
Attachments
-
Triss.JPG
There's a lot of overlap between this thread and this one.
I'm going to give the OP a few more hours to see if she comes back to continue the discussion, but if not, this thread will be locked and the discussion can continue in the other thread, as it seems to be more active. The last few posts will be copied over so that ongoing conversations can continue.
I'm going to give the OP a few more hours to see if she comes back to continue the discussion, but if not, this thread will be locked and the discussion can continue in the other thread, as it seems to be more active. The last few posts will be copied over so that ongoing conversations can continue.
This thread will be closed, and some recent posts will be copied to the thread Sarkeesian predicts Witcher 3 will be "misogynist"; followups to that thread. @Abuye There is nothing wrong with your English. For many of us, it is not our first language. Thank you for being understanding about this.
- Status