Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
October 24, 2014, 04:55:02 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
RPGFan Community Quiz!
Persona 3 FES Quiz is now OVER!
Winner was user: Monsoon!
334773 Posts in 13711 Topics by 2200 Members
Latest Member: Rgeneb1
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  RPGFan Message Boards
|-+  The Rest
| |-+  General Discussions
| | |-+  is this a bs excuse for not having females in war games?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 Print
Author Topic: is this a bs excuse for not having females in war games?  (Read 11965 times)
CastNuri
AMG A GIRL
Posts: 1287


There are no coincidences.

Member
*

CastNuri
View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #60 on: March 23, 2010, 11:11:52 PM »

Still an offputting opinion, seeing as just as many males play large emotional roles in family building these days - if we're going by traditional family roles (because that's what you seem to be using) there's a reason the stereotypical family includes the whole 'dad playing catch with son' thing. I don't find your opinion sensible in the least, especially when put in terms of "When women die, bad things happen." Way to give the wrong impression.

Depends on what traditional family roles we're talking about; American, Middle-Eastern, East Asian, etc. Most boys I know -- and I don't care how often they play catch with their Dads -- are more emotionally tied to their mothers. It's the impression I've received and I'm willing to admit it's not universally applicable.

But I'll stand by this 'wrong' impression I'm giving. Maybe "when women die, bad things happen" isn't an accurate term but when I read it in Ryos' post, it did strike a cord in me. So I'm emphasizing the role of women in civilian life-- what's the problem there? Not to mention society has been conditioned for generations to adapt to the loss of the male role in cases of war.
Logged

"It is a silly game where nobody wins. " ~ Thomas Fuller ~

http://castnuri.tumblr.com
Ithunn
Posts: 186


Hmph.

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #61 on: April 22, 2010, 08:17:07 PM »

Late response. Blame finals.

Women have been set at a disadvantage since Eve decided to eat that damned apple. (lololol, I just really want to say that. I'm totally full of misogynist philosophical banter from the Protestant Reformation and German Mysticism).

Women, in games, is an interesting topic. A bit too broad of a topic, but I do have a couple things I'd like to mention first.

1. People who complain about women's rights =/= feminists. That word is thrown around excessively by those who clearly operate on an overblown idea of Feminism (quite possibly a result of a misshapen group identity that's changed generationally). Tossing that around as a term of endearment does absolutely nothing but stunt intriguing conversation, because name callers have nothing relevant or genuine to say.

2. The role of "Woman" in Western society has taken on so many different levels that it will be hard to please everybody. Left 4 Dead 2 Black woman offends women. Samus offends women. Yuna offends women. Princess Peach offends women. As a gamer, I feel that some female gamers pursue identifying themselves as an "other" type of gamer unrepresentative of the games they play. They want something more in their female characters that I don't believe many characters, even non-human, have generally achieved. The archetypical female is symptomatic of a grand large male industry targeted towards a male audience that can barely grasp the brain of a female more than they can the idealized re-hashed image of types of females. This is the beginning of the issue.

With that said, I don't think having females in war games would provide any significant impetus for change in war games. A good example of this is Halo. There can be "feminized" troop members - the color pink is available, you can change your voice, etc. The bare necessities are only a cosmetic change to appeal more broadly. Unfortunately, in terms of war throughout media, when a woman is put into a war setting, the focus is on the fact that she is a woman in the war compared to a troop member. No life is greater than another despite gender/sexual "obligations," strong points and weak points.

However, the fact that there is a significant amount of women in the Air Force/Army, I can definitely understand wanting more reflective numbers throughout everything and not just games.

As far as the article is concerned, I don't think it is a bullshit excuse. I actually think it's a very interesting idea to bring up. The concept of needing to create a female skeleton and allotted memory for the game, the available community to profit from for these designs and what is more important really begs at the better question the person skirts. Why wouldn't men want to play as females, and why assume that the entire gamer base wants to play as a male? I understand other games, like a lot of RPGs, don't really allow you to map your personality/etc. onto a generic character besides silent mains, but FPSs are generally like that. I realize I answered part of my question in the upper part of this perhaps, continually growing response . .  but I really think his "avoidance" and the implications that derive from that really helps add to the integration of "acceptable" women in games.

Having women assume the male gaze gets old pretty fast (if one consciously acknowledges it). I wonder if war simulations in the military are gendered or not.
Logged
Lucid
Posts: 315


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #62 on: May 06, 2010, 04:33:48 AM »

I don't have an issue with the notion that certain people dying will affect their loved ones less, rather the idea of using gender as a measure for that, which is appalling.

I'm not trying to impose some black and white 'measure' here. I think that the death of a female in the family is more likely to effect a family on deeper level than the death of a male, because I believe that females usually play a larger emotional role in family building.

It's a perfectly sensible notion and it's also (if I may bring this back to the topic) why I don't like the idea of drafting women into combat-- keeping in mind that I've already mentioned how the concept women volunteers don't bother me.
No, it isn't a sensible notion because you haven't provided solid reasoning as a basis for your argument. You say it's because you believe females usually play a larger emotional role in family building. Based on what? Your own experiences, those of people you know? That's not really a  basis to make a case that the idea of women in combat isn't ideal.

To use an actual verifiable example of familial loss in modern society, let's use black people in american culture. Many families deal with absentee fathers. This is a statistical fact. This is a major contributing factor to the sustained participation in gangs by many young black males. This doesn't mean this is a greater loss or impact than losing their mothers or other female family members though.

It's just very spurious to say the loss of one sex or the other to a family will have greater impact.
Logged
Ithunn
Posts: 186


Hmph.

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #63 on: May 06, 2010, 06:17:10 PM »

Eh, I think your example sort of works against you. If the black mothers were as negligible as the absentee fathers, there would be no one (presumably without setting something up) of blood to take care of the child. Therefore the mother is extremely vital in whatever "family" building that child could be exposed to.

IE, if America drafted black women particularly, the black community would be broken up more than it already is. I say this from personal experience as a black female in the South, with only a mother and a brother and one aunt.


Edit* Put "family," in quotes as I fully accept non-blood people raising children into a family structure is possible too.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2010, 06:20:05 PM by Ithunn » Logged
CastNuri
AMG A GIRL
Posts: 1287


There are no coincidences.

Member
*

CastNuri
View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #64 on: May 06, 2010, 07:05:33 PM »

What he said.

And for the record-- I've already said my oh-so-spurious statement isn't universally applicable, that it varies from culture to culture. I'm just saying it is more likely to have a larger impact. As far as practicality is concerned, I don't see why anyone has a problem with this. I observe that under the circumstances of the society I mix with, losing a woman in the family would be "worse". Hence drafting women into war should be avoided under those circumstances.
Logged

"It is a silly game where nobody wins. " ~ Thomas Fuller ~

http://castnuri.tumblr.com
Lucid
Posts: 315


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #65 on: May 07, 2010, 04:02:12 AM »

You both misunderstood my example.  Black father absenteeism is no better or worse than if the mothers were gone and not the fathers. That's the point. If black mothers for some reason or another were taken away from families but for whatever reason the problem with absentee fathers didn't exist and they were there, it wouldn't be worse somehow than the reverse situation. It would be different.

Castnuri has no basis on which to build the argument that losing a woman in a family is objectively worse than losing a man in a family. It's more likely to? Based on? You own observations of a culture aren't enough without academic evidence to back this up. Larger impact, how so? This is all very vague and doesn't seem like a very well informed opinion.
Logged
CastNuri
AMG A GIRL
Posts: 1287


There are no coincidences.

Member
*

CastNuri
View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #66 on: May 07, 2010, 11:58:19 AM »

The hell? I'm not proposing a Government plan that legislates against the drafting of women into war. I'm just making an opinion based on personal observations (which is what opinions tend to be, mind you). It's a deduction. From what I see and read, I observe that women play a larger emotional role in families. As a result, I deduce that it would be more emotionally damaging for a family to lose a female.

I'm not going to launch into a soci-statistical based argument on a subject that is probably still heavily debated in academia. When I post here, I'm just saying what I think-- I don't expect to be asked for references, sources or a damn bibliography. My opinion is as informed as any idiot who thinks he knows what's wrong with the economy after reading the newspapers; it's general and personal. If you have a problem with my perspective, that's fine. Just leave it the hell alone if it bothers you that much.
Logged

"It is a silly game where nobody wins. " ~ Thomas Fuller ~

http://castnuri.tumblr.com
Ashton
Contributing Editor
Posts: 5099


Lawful Asshole

Member
*


View Profile WWW

Ignore
« Reply #67 on: May 07, 2010, 01:06:57 PM »

The point of opinion sharing is actually to change and adapt your viewpoints when/if you learn that your opinions are invalid and/or wrong. The argument "leave my opinion alone" doesn't hold water, all it demonstrates is an inability to defend.

The whole "opinions can't be wrong" argument is bull, too. After all, it was Hitler's opinion that Jews should be killed. Not making a direct comparison, mind you, just sayin'.
Logged

CastNuri
AMG A GIRL
Posts: 1287


There are no coincidences.

Member
*

CastNuri
View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #68 on: May 07, 2010, 03:02:55 PM »

Sure-- because realistically, opinions are bound to change when people are sharing them, right? Not all opinions change everytime opinions are shared.

I'm telling him to leave it alone 'cause I've already tried defending my statement and it seems like a moot point right now. I could continue to defend it but this topic is so dead in my head right now that I don't think I could give a shit anymore. It's my way of trying to withdraw from an argument that is leading nowhere.

Clearly, I'm too thick-headed to change my opinion. Didn't say if it was wrong/right. It just is the way it is and I've made allowances to it by ensuring that nobody thinks it is a universal statement. So if you got beef with the statement, that's fine. I know that and I also know the arguments against it.
Logged

"It is a silly game where nobody wins. " ~ Thomas Fuller ~

http://castnuri.tumblr.com
Lucid
Posts: 315


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #69 on: May 07, 2010, 03:52:12 PM »

Castnuri, it's not that you can't have your opinion or something. It's just that when someone makes such a bold claim like women would be more emotionally missed than men in families, it's pretty much a given that the opinion should be backed up by something, not just "I think that's how it is". Otherwise, what's the point of raising that opinion in a discussion?

Look, I'm sorry if it came across as harsh to you to challenge your opinion on something like this, but I think when you make such grand claims, you should expect more opposition to it than if you said you thought apples were better than oranges.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2010, 03:59:25 PM by Lucid » Logged
CastNuri
AMG A GIRL
Posts: 1287


There are no coincidences.

Member
*

CastNuri
View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #70 on: May 07, 2010, 05:44:26 PM »

Well if it helps, I didn't think it was a grand claim at all. But maybe I've grown up under different conditions and circumstances so I see things differently.
Logged

"It is a silly game where nobody wins. " ~ Thomas Fuller ~

http://castnuri.tumblr.com
Ithunn
Posts: 186


Hmph.

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #71 on: May 07, 2010, 09:09:37 PM »

You both misunderstood my example.  Black father absenteeism is no better or worse than if the mothers were gone and not the fathers. That's the point. If black mothers for some reason or another were taken away from families but for whatever reason the problem with absentee fathers didn't exist and they were there, it wouldn't be worse somehow than the reverse situation. It would be different.

No, I understood your example, but it was impractical to what you were trying to prove. It currently holds little real-world application to general black society. I never said it was better or worse - but I was going off of the point that the fathers were absent already. If there was the condition of black mothers as systematic absentee parents, and men were the main parent and drafted, it would have the same affect. However, I'm going to just say that it is considered that mothers are the ones more attached to a child. I have no statistics - I'm just going off of societal roles. And in that case, drafting women would be a pretty lame thing. Society is more progressive these days - there's single fathers and such, but I still feel that it's personally disproportionate. I even said I agreed with you.


Edit* Appparently I didn't, but I did in my mind~
« Last Edit: May 07, 2010, 09:22:14 PM by Ithunn » Logged
Dincrest
Spectrum
RPGFan Editor
Posts: 11883


Stumpy McGunder- thumps

Member
*


View Profile WWW
« Reply #72 on: May 07, 2010, 10:05:58 PM »

I'm reminded of that bit in Bill Cosby: Himself where he says his role as a father is, "I brought you into this world, and I can take you out!  Makes no difference, I can just make another one that looks exactly like me."  

Comedy aside, as for the importance of parents, it shouldn't have to be a pissing contest.  Mothers and fathers both have distinct and important roles.  In my years working in education, boys and girls who have a solid father figure in their lives are more psychologically stable than those who don't.  Not just for boys (which is why I think there need to be more male teachers in grades P-3 because women simply do not fundamentally understand boys on a visceral level.  If you were never a guy, you simply won't understand those "it's a guy thing" things, just like since I was never a girl, I'll never viscerally understand those "it's a girl thing" things) but for girls too.  Daddy issues completely affect girls' interpersonal relationships later in life, particularly with men.    

My mom will tell you, the period of time in my growing up when my dad lived in another state was pure hell for her.  I was a monster.  Sure before my dad would travel a lot, but that didn't affect me as much since I always knew he'd come back.  (of course, him being gone a lot left me with a few daddy issues, but that's another case study for another time.)  It was only when my dad became a more present fixture in my life again that I started behaving better.  And it's not like my dad really did anything major or whatever, but psychologically, I was more stable with my dad around.  No one would ever believe that I was a monster child circa ages 11-14, that because I was an emotional wreck and didn't know how to channel/express it I was an asshole to my mom and used her as a proverbial punching bag for my emotional outbursts, and having my dad back in my life made the world of difference.  

Being a mom is the most important and most thankless job in the world.  When an elderly woman reflects back on her life, no one cares if she was the best CEO or whatever; the only thing on her and others' minds is whether she was a good mom.  Seriously, the kind of stuff our moms have put up with... I was generally a good kid, but I put my mom through hell at times and she always had to deal 100% with the brunt of it.  There is no denying the importance of moms.  However, I think that dads have an underrated role as well.  Dads are very important and children with present dads are more psychologically stable than those who do not.  
« Last Edit: May 07, 2010, 10:07:43 PM by Dincrest » Logged

Next bike-a-thon: Diabetes Tour-de-Cure 2015
Lucid
Posts: 315


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #73 on: May 08, 2010, 03:29:53 AM »

You both misunderstood my example.  Black father absenteeism is no better or worse than if the mothers were gone and not the fathers. That's the point. If black mothers for some reason or another were taken away from families but for whatever reason the problem with absentee fathers didn't exist and they were there, it wouldn't be worse somehow than the reverse situation. It would be different.

No, I understood your example, but it was impractical to what you were trying to prove. It currently holds little real-world application to general black society. I never said it was better or worse - but I was going off of the point that the fathers were absent already. If there was the condition of black mothers as systematic absentee parents, and men were the main parent and drafted, it would have the same affect. However, I'm going to just say that it is considered that mothers are the ones more attached to a child. I have no statistics - I'm just going off of societal roles. And in that case, drafting women would be a pretty lame thing. Society is more progressive these days - there's single fathers and such, but I still feel that it's personally disproportionate. I even said I agreed with you.


Edit* Appparently I didn't, but I did in my mind~
I guess it was somewhat impractical, I honestly just used it as an example because that subject was on my mind after having viewed a documentary about the bloods and crips, where familial roles played an important segment. It also happens a lot in the city I live in with the large aboriginal population here. Personal experience as well.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2010, 03:31:26 AM by Lucid » Logged
Willy Elektrix
Lord of the Sword
Posts: 531


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #74 on: May 08, 2010, 12:24:00 PM »

Off subject: Has anyone else played that 90s squad-based tactical game, Gender Wars on PC? It's about a future war where men and women have gunfights against each other for control of the world.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  



Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!