Can we not call objectification and sexualization “fan service”?

Hupsel

Member
Oct 28, 2017
504
Hmm I think that objectification is too harsh in certain cases. I am fine with fan service, although fan service can turn into objectification sometimes.

I´d say that fan service can exist as a part of the character, and objectification defines the character. For example, if a female character starts a game already in a super skimpy outfit and with her boobs almost hanging out I´d say it´s a case of objectification. There is no redeeming quality to the character and she was created from the get to please her audience.

Fan service would be a case where the, well, the "fan service" is a smaller part of an already established character. I´ll take Ann from Persona 5 as an example - and most female characters from that game. They don´t have complex stories, but they at least have a background. The beach scene is an example of fan service, and you get hints that Ann is the sexy character in multiple scenes (like the van one in Futaba´s palace), which could be considered fan service.

I don´t think fan service is bad, when used well and sparsely, even if some scenes can be dumb. I´m of the opinion that being sexy is good, for men and for women.

Also the discussion of fan service can go even beyond scenes where characters are shown in swimsuits or lingerie. Most videogame characters are created from the start with beautiful faces and bodies, which helps people feel more attached to them. Sure, Overwatch has a big cast of characters, but most of them are beautiful models like Mercy, D.Va, Symmetra, Widowmaker and so on, which helps to move merchandise and create billions of fan art. So... could even a cast of characters created as paragons of beauty already be considered fan service?
 

Budi

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,460
Finland
Sure. If it bothers people, I can make an effort to change the language I use. I haven't seen fanservice as a positive term though, just so widely used that it catched on. Fanservice = unnecessary pandering, so not a positive.
 

Radeo

Banned
Apr 26, 2019
1,305
User banned (permanent): defending and admitting to enjoying the sexualization of minors
Im in the mood to call you a nonce going from those past posts nevermind a creep. My word.

I gave you every opportunity to call that stuff out, even gave you a lead in to reply that it’s disgusting yet you preferred to ignore that and focus on something entirely different. Whilst not only asking you to reflect on your words you then decide to ignore that as well and try to make it seem like others are in the wrong.
Because I don't think it's disgusting. It's disgusting to treat real people like that, but I think it can exist just fine in media and there's plenty of artists that do it for fun and plenty of people who can like it without treating women like that

Doing sometbing in your own time doesn’t make it not creepy or free from criticism on a forum. If you’re into media that sexualizes young looking girls then you’re a creep. If that doesn’t apply to you, then what’s your problem?
I do like some of it, plenty of people can be into it and still be healthy
 

Flon

Member
Oct 27, 2017
563
It's a well understood, widely used term that tells you exactly what to expect. It does mean other things, but that isn't nearly as common anymore I find.

The term is already there for exactly what we're all implying.
 
Last edited:

HaremKing

Member
Dec 20, 2018
847

Gold Arsene

Member
Oct 27, 2017
20,009
I almost never hear the term "fanservice" used for anything besides sexualization before coming to this forum. I was introduced to the term by that definition in referring to stuff like Dead or Alive.
 

Odeko

The Fallen
Mar 22, 2018
3,474
Midwestern America
“Let’s all change a common unambiguous phrase that everyone uses and understands” threads are my favorite.

Have y’all never heard of descriptivism?
 
User Banned (1 Month): Misogynistic Drive-By Trolling, Hostility, Account in Junior Phase
It’s a euphemism for something that does not deserve to be brushed off and belittled. Not every fan of a series wants female characters treated this way and many people that may be interested in a series are pushed away as a result of this treatment. It seems to excuse developers as “just giving fans what they want” and not holding them accountable for their sexism.

What are your reasons for using the phrase “fan service” instead of objectification or sexualization?
 

Sparkedglory2

Member
Nov 3, 2017
2,505
I almost never hear the term "fanservice" used for anything besides sexualization before coming to this forum. I was introduced to the term by that definition in referring to stuff like Dead or Alive.
I think that’s a fault of the forum. I’ve seen people on era call people weird for like Chibi art because they confused it for loli. Some people just don’t know.
 

Shining Star

Member
May 14, 2019
633
I don't think anyone is ever going to agree on what is objectification or serialization but if you just call it all fan-service then people can decide on their own if they like it or not.
 

ZSJ

Member
Jul 21, 2019
270
User banned (1 week) Misrepresenting concerns around sexist objectification, whataboutism.
Fan service is for both sexes - it's a generic term.
This. Look at Capcoms alt costumes for proof.

I love how this forum is totally fine with shooting a face off but seeing some leg or a bra is like a calling for censorship. Then again you can walk around stores with a gun but you can't be a prostitute cuz Murica.
 

Mona

Member
Oct 30, 2017
15,646
Fan service can also refer to callbacks, cameos, and plot points that match fan theories/expectations.

It shouldn’t be used as a euphemism for objectification/sexualization.
yea i remember when rogue one came out that vader stuff at the end was refereed to alot as pure fan service
 

Rotimi

Member
Dec 25, 2017
878
Lagos , Nigeria
Call it what you want. Some like the term and I prefer it. It can be sexual or not. Easter egg is also a great term but it’s just a term. Use what you want.

Some people like the sexual fan service and it depends on the audience you are going for.

Dating sims for a more female audience or games that expect a high female player base may decide to add some male sexualization. But most will call it fan service and it’s okay
It’s just a term. People calling it creep service or perve service are really surprising me. It’s like they haven’t watched tv in decades but obviously that is considered plot.
 

Kewlmyc

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
12,842
I think the term still fits. While it doesn't cater to you or me, most of it is dedicated to a specific part of a fanbase, the perverts, so the term still applies.

I agree that fan service is a broad term that is mostly just used for to describe the pervert stuff, though anything that is tailor made to excite a fanbase counts as fanservice.
 

-PXG-

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,396
NJ
So the solution is to stigmatize and shun anything remotely sexual? Seems kinda hypocritical coming from folks who preach acceptance and inclusion, respect, empathy and tolerance.

Kinda shows the lack of unity amongst some of you folks.

"Accept me, but fuck X thing I don't like"

And no I'm not defending the sexualization of those underage or defending pedophiles. So miss me with that bullshit.
 

lactatingduck

Member
Oct 25, 2017
437
So the solution is to stigmatize and shun anything remotely sexual? Seems kinda hypocritical coming from folks who preach acceptance and inclusion, respect, empathy and tolerance.

Kinda shows the lack of unity amongst some of you folks.

"Accept me, but fuck X thing I don't like"
What exactly do you believe people are rejecting in this thread?
 

Mr. Poolman

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
3,015
I agree with you OP.

A movie like Avengers Endgame is full of fanservice por the fans of the series, but somehow on videogames, "fanservice" refers to sexualization.
Call it for what it is.
 

deprecated

Member
Apr 15, 2019
224
Um, no. By casting fans who approve and appreciate sexualization of that art through a lens that they are somehow sexist is stigmatizing.
Ah, this line is the hangup.
It seems to excuse developers as “just giving fans what they want” and not holding them accountable for their sexism.
Context is key and the OP seems to be lacking it. Series aimed to sexualize everything? Don't see the issue. Fan art of a character or series? That's up to you. Sexualizing or objectifying the side character in an otherwise straight laced piece? That's definitely serving one part of the audience to the exclusion of everyone else. That doesn't have to be sexist but since the OP specifically said female characters it can be.
 

¡ B 0 0 P !

Member
Apr 4, 2019
1,247
Greater Toronto Area
So the solution is to stigmatize and shun anything remotely sexual? Seems kinda hypocritical coming from folks who preach acceptance and inclusion, respect, empathy and tolerance.

Kinda shows the lack of unity amongst some of you folks.

"Accept me, but fuck X thing I don't like"

And no I'm not defending the sexualization of those underage or defending pedophiles. So miss me with that bullshit.
Sexualization is fine. What’s not fine is when it only gets applied to women and even worse women in games that aren’t advertised as being erotica.

Think all those super serious RPGs where the male characters wear theme appropriate outfits while the female characters only get lingerie and chain mail bikinis.
 

Chudah

Member
Apr 23, 2019
109
This is ambiguous, though. There are competing uses.
Exactly. And honestly, if you'd never heard of the term before, you probably would have no idea that it's being used to refer to gratuitous shots that objectify women (and in some cases men), in anime/videogames. At face value, the words themselves don't even imply anything sexual.
 

Parmenide

Member
Dec 8, 2017
466
I think the problem is that, you said "boobs and asses", which qualifies as objectification, no one sees a woman, they are "just boobs and asses".
Don’t play these games with me, fanservice is (in one of its forms) ‘boobs and asses’. The rest is plot, characters and what not.
My point with the other guy is that we shouldn’t call normal sexuality a perversion and keep it alway in the closet. Yes people like sex and some games like to play with it, others don’t and it’s fine as well.
 

-PXG-

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,396
NJ
Sexualization is fine. What’s not fine is when it only gets applied to women and even worse women in games that aren’t advertised as being erotica.

Think all those super serious RPGs where the male characters wear theme appropriate outfits while the female characters only get lingerie and chain mail bikinis.
I think we can all draw the line at anything that glorifies rape or abuse. Or anything that is a gratuitous display of dehumanization too.
 

Sailent

Member
Mar 2, 2018
1,365
Don’t play these games with me, fanservice is (in one of its forms) ‘boobs and asses’. The rest is plot, characters and what not.
My point with the other guy is that we shouldn’t call normal sexuality a perversion and keep it alway in the closet. Yes people like sex and some games like to play with it, others don’t and it’s fine as well.

I think, as the OP stated, fanservice is cattering to the fans, not necesarily by objectifying and sexualizing their female characters but pleasing them with the content they really want to see. As someone said, Dragon Ball Super is all about fan service, yet you won't see an ass in your face in it.

Fan service VS sexualizing and objectifying, for me, is not the same thing. It's really sad that "giving the fans what they want" is simply reducing their female characters to "boobs and asses".

The problem comes when you put this shit in everything, and you can't even watch a regular shonen without some girl appearing in her undies or with skimpy outfits to please perverts, call it what you want, but that's what they are.

It's ok to enjoy things sexually, nobody will shame you, but there's already another content created specifically for that (which is also fucked up, but that's another topic for another day). Not everything needs to have half naked ladies with their boobs bouncing around.

If you are trying to disguise sexualization as "normal sexuality", that's a problem.

Sexualization is fine.
No. How in the fuck is sexualization going to be good but "only if you sexualize both men and women"? That's like saying "women traficking is good but only if you throw some dudes in there aswell, lol".
 

lactatingduck

Member
Oct 25, 2017
437
Most of the post are complaining about sexual things in games and giving it funny names, Instead of discussing the actual term.
Plus the other shit that had gone down in the thread
They’re discussing the actual term “fam service” by trying to identify the nuance between what they believe is fine or objectionable fan service.

Most of the opposition been about general sexualization but a lot of the opposition in here has been to specifically depicting young girls sexually, which I haven’t seen you speak on other than to call it “that other shit” that went down in the thread.
 

Nerokis

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,817
I think the term has a place, and disagree with the implication in the OP that objectification/sexualization need to be stigmatized in every context such that ever referring to them as "fan service" is inherently euphemistic. Horniness in media can be fun, and the term "fan service" (in this usage) acknowledges the trend of media utilizing that in goofy-ass, pandering ways.

But yeah, usage of the term definitely has a euphemistic element, and it's worthwhile to be watchful of that.
 
Nov 17, 2017
7,347
It’s a euphemism for something that does not deserve to be brushed off and belittled. Not every fan of a series wants female characters treated this way and many people that may be interested in a series are pushed away as a result of this treatment. It seems to excuse developers as “just giving fans what they want” and not holding them accountable for their sexism.

What are your reasons for using the phrase “fan service” instead of objectification or sexualization?
Fanservice doesn't mean that it will appeal to every fan ever. It's just a general understanding that it was done to appeal to certain fans.

I also don't think "fanservice" as a term excuses developers for giving fans what they want. I don't think I've really ever heard it used that way. In fact, I've seen many people refer to fanservice of the sexual type in a negative way for many things. If you want to call it objectification or sexualization, go ahead but it's weird trying to make other people not use it. We all know what people are saying when they use the word.


This is what I always understood fan service to mean, and it makes perfect sense in that role. Seeing it refer also to sexually objectified characters always seemed odd, and frankly, improper to me.
It's not that odd. Take a shonen manga; their demographic are teenage boys and so using sexualized images or situations is often made to appeal to that demographic aka made to service fans with something they are perceived to like. Fanservice can be many different things.
 

DVCY201

Member
Oct 25, 2017
977
Eh, fanservice is pretty broad and the definition most people are coming from is that of a straight male, when there is fanservice for women too in otome games, anime, etc. So, are we calling it "creepservice" for both then? I don't think I can agree.
 

Sankara

Alt Account
Banned
May 19, 2019
1,311
Paris
it's used to white-wash actual sexual objectification. It's just a way for people to feel good about themselves without being explicit about their vices. It's like a dog whistle similar to when white people use "inner city kids" and so on. A roundabout way to avoid feeling racist or sexist or whatever