• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Morrigan

Spear of the Metal Church
Member
Oct 24, 2017
34,315
Well, what can I productively say then if you've made your mind up about me? If so, fair enough, I can't change anything if your mind is made up. Do remember in this instance you quoted me, which means you began the potential debate between our thoughts and ideas. It wasn't a good start just saying mansplaining and I refuse/don't need to engage with your long posts as they don't say much. That doesn't really leave me anything to go on and makes it quite pointless you even engaged with me in the first place other than to put me down/have a remark.
You can see it as a way to try and be concise next time, instead of rambling about biological differences, Tinder hookups, and borderline condescending explanations of how sex and sexual attractions actually work. Just sayin'. And um, it's hard not to be snarky when you read something like this:
This shouldn't be a controversial statement to say, but males should be able to have sexual gratification, just as women should.
I mean... considering 90% of entertainment is filled to the brim with the male gaze, writing this in a thread about Quiet is truly one of the most tone-deaf things you've written. Surely you can see that.
 

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
You can see it as a way to try and be concise next time, instead of rambling about biological differences, Tinder hookups, and borderline condescending explanations of how sex and sexual attractions actually work. Just sayin'. And um, it's hard not to be snarky when you read something like this:

I mean... considering 90% of entertainment is filled to the brim with the male gaze, writing this in a thread about Quiet is truly one of the most tone-deaf things you've written. Surely you can see that.

Morrigan, I can try and spend time articulating myself without putdowns because I write a lot. You aren't marking me for an assignment where there is a word count. Biological reasonings are a massive reason why sex and sexuality exists. I always try to link and source my reasonings for that. That takes time to do, there's a lot in the fields of biology and psychology around sex. Sorry if it's not concise enough for you, but I personally think it's worth trying to discuss in detail if anyone wants to try and have a deeper understanding of humans and why they behave/consume as they do. You choose to be snarky, you don't need to. Others don't when they disagree and want to challenge someone. All it does is make people feel hostile towards you as snark is the lowest form of engagement you can offer someone.

Why don't you also quote the parts of my posts where I say I know the industry is heavily catered towards males? I did that multiple times. Quiet is like the diving board of a broader discussion around many of the things I brought up, as she's so in your face it elicits a wide response from people who start to call out all sexualisation. I've said since day 1, even on that other board, I think she's a terrible character, and Kojima was wrong to put out that tweet. Someone else just brought up Nier, that and Bayonetta is how you're honest about a product you've created that caters towards males, presumably straight males. What I did say about Kojima in here was I didn't feel there was evidence to say he's a misogynist because art/make belief isn't always an endorsement of personal views. You said in one of your earlier posts

He clearly has no respect for women and just loves their bodies.

That is a very definitive statement to make about someone, not over their real life actions/interactions, but their make belief fantasy work. I would ask you would you feel that way of a woman writing romance novels who depicts all men in a certain way to cater to her female audience that want to buy into fantasy for sexualisation/sexual desires? What would you say about E. L. James? This is debating a difference of critique/dislike of work and the actual person. Yes, sometimes work and intent from creation can mimic the creator. Not always though, artistically you can do many things/cater to certain audiences, but distance your work from you as a person.
 
Last edited:
Oct 25, 2017
7,624
canada
You guys ever get some kind of dissonance from the fact that one of the most celebrated gaming icons of all time defends Quiet's depiction with an explanation that pathetic?

I mean, don't get me wrong, Kojima has contributed a lot of great gaming moments and Death Stranding will probably be it's own kind of awesome. I have a lot of respect for the man. I just feel a little dissonance when I try to reconcile my respect for that man with my incredulity at that statement.

Hes pervy which is fine but he not honest about it which is not. Yoko Taro is open bout his perviness and so we enjoy him as a person more
 

BossAttack

Member
Oct 27, 2017
42,954
Going "actually here's what misogyny is" kinda is, dude. But we've been over this before.

I am familiar with your long posts. Just because they are long doesn't mean they say much. Honestly it can be condensed to that, the fact that you used many many words doesn't change that. Then there's the number of strawmen (one of which I called out). And Faircure already did a nice takedown of the rest so I don't really need to.


Sniper Wolf was a decent character but the cleavage was gratuitous and unnecessary. It's just the juvenile "lol boobs" trope Kojima does in every single one of his games. In MGS1, it's mildly eye-rolling, but at least it's not too bad. In MGS3, it's getting more insulting, as if super spies and soldiers and terrorists would be so easily fooled by a woman just because she runs around with her underwear exposed. It's bad writing (because Kojima is a hack). In MGS4, the sheer objectification is taken to a whole other level with the B&B, and it's frankly offensive how the game lets the player ogle traumatized victims. And why sexualize Naomi all of a sudden? At least Sniper Wolf was written to be a femme fatale, but Naomi is just more random tits just because he can. He doesn't even respect his own characters, he just makes 'em all fap material. It's pathetic and ridiculous.

Well, I feel that characters like Wolf and EVA fit the tone of their respective games, especially EVA. MGS3 is intentionally trying to be campy like an old 60's Bond movie, EVA fits right into this Bond girl trope. Of course, the dynamic is switched with Snake being the one getting seduced and manipulated by the female spy as opposed to the other way around which is how your Bond film is supposed to play out. That said, I agree that Kojima seems to have lost his marbles comes MGS4 where you have this B&B unit of psychologically damaged females that the player can also take lewd pictures of as they pose for your after you beat them to a pulp. But, MGS4 is literally rife with tonal issues on every side of the gender. Vamp dick knifing around, Ocelot hamming it up to the Nth degree, shirtless geriatrics fighting, Sunny stutters around telling Snake to stop smoking, Naomi has her tits out to seduce Otacon (well, hey at least Otacon is consistent in his tastes), EVA shows her cleavage in her old ass age (who are you trying to seduce now?), "I am the Lightning," Johnny shits himself for the hundredth time, Meryl and Johnny being a thing, fucking Mt. Snakemore on a submarine...

I can't. I Can't. I CAN'T!

MGS4 is the most fanservice, animu, crazy ass bullshit I have played. And, I somehow I enjoyed it immensely. As bad as Quiet in MGSV is, I don't think anything can top the B&B unit stuff. Hell, even the homoerotic shower fight between Kaz and Snake or Strangelove lotion time in PW can be explained away in context. Nothing explains the B&B photo mode besides, "lel bewbs."
 

faircure

Member
Oct 27, 2017
631
Of Metal Gear's female characters I only think The Boss, EVA and Sniper Wolf could be considered not sexist imo. Sniper Wolf has the same degree of sexualization and backstory as the other MGS1 bosses, so I think she's okay. The Boss and EVA have strong characterization of their own and while EVA's outfit is ridiculous, I've seen enough of Big Boss's spandexed ass to know it goes both ways. Just assume I'm excluding them in the next statements I'll make.

One thing I've noticed is that, excluding the above, all of Metal Gear's female characters are sexy and young. This is in contrast to the male characters who have a full range of personality traits, including some who are sexy. But not all of them. The plot drivers are also all male, surprise surprise. I love The Boss, but she was there as a means of character development for Big Boss. I really would've liked to see that spinoff game starring her to really flesh her out more and make her stand on her own. The designs themselves I think could mostly be chalked up to preference, I don't have a major problem with them. This is besides Quiet's which is just so ridiculous. Some of the male designs equal the amount of sexualization in the ladies too. It's the treatment of the women which gets sketchy.

As far back as MGS1 you had multiple opportunities to see Meryl in just her underwear. She doesn't even show you consensually, you have to walk in on her changing or use the bathroom. I hope I don't have to explain how uncomfortable and creepy that seems. There's a whole required segment where you have to watch Meryl's ass to find her in a crowd which I don't think would've been done with any male characters.
Quiet has been explained multiple times in this thread so I won't go into it. Paz looks underage and is presented as underage so it's very creepy to see her in a bikini and be able to imply sexual acts in her date side mission. I know she's 20, but that's a cop-out. It's the same logic of "she's not 5 years old she's an 1000 year-old dragon!" Strangelove molests said implied underage character and pushes the whole predatory lesbian stereotype. You can make Rose's boobs jiggle in MGS4 if you shake the controller.

I can go on but I hope I've explained enough to show how much I don't approve of Kojima's treatment of the majority of his female characters. There's a way to have a good, sexy female character without being creepy and sexist, but he doesn't get it. I hope I'm not too off topic posting this!
 
Oct 25, 2017
7,624
canada
The scenes that I really have a problem with are the ones when she's in her cell, prancing around sexually for the player to ogle, because she's literally in a cage and only there as a sexual object. It's just straight up misogyny. His depiction of Quiet feels like something you'd see in a 1990's PC game. I gotta wonder what his relationship with his wife is like.


i just found out he has a son and a wife. weird
 

Morrigan

Spear of the Metal Church
Member
Oct 24, 2017
34,315
MGS3 is intentionally trying to be campy like an old 60's Bond movie,
Bond movies are incredibly sexist too, sometimes straight-up misogynistic even. Just repeating sexist tropes because they exist or "it's an homage" doesn't exempt one from the criticism. It's like having a blackface character in 2017 and saying "oh it's an homage to those old racist movies". My answer to that is: OK, and...? That's still racist. You probably do realize that, but I just want to point this out.

You aren't marking me for an assignment where there is a word count.
So? Doesn't mean I can't comment on your meandering/rambling.
Biological reasonings are a massive reason why sex and sexuality exists.
OK see, why do you think this is a worthwhile comment? You criticize my snark, but really, the only possible response to something as condescending is gonna be, um, "Ya think?" or "Thanks captain obvious". C'mon.
All it does is make people feel hostile towards you as snark is the lowest form of engagement you can offer someone.
You're being dramatic. I can certainly think of "lowest forms of engagement" than snarky dismissal of bad arguments.

Anyway, if you're so interested in discussion, maybe focus on addressing the strawman I pointed out ("these two paragraphs are more about trying to illustrate how every single thing in life that involves female nudity/sexualisation is not instantly misogyny", you should realize that no one has argued the bolded part, so this means your two paragraphs were wasted on a arguing against nothing), instead of complaining about snark. Or you could address faircure's excellent rebuttals. It's weird that you think I'm too "hostile", but you still choose to respond to me, whereas faircure is responding without the slightest hint of snark and you're completely ignoring them. If you think I'm that hostile, then I suggest you ignore me, and respond to them instead.

[Edit: I wrote this post at 4:50 PM EST. You edited your post with a huge chunk of content at 4:50, 30m after making it, so of course I didn't see it, and only spotted this now [at 11:50 PM] by coincidence. I'm sure you aren't doing this deliberately, and of course everyone is allowed to edit their post, but if you want to elaborate on something 30m later after writing it, I would advise to either mention your edited post, or make a new one.

To respond to the point about Kojima, I am basing this not just on Quiet, but on his entire body of work, including his tendency to have (non-porn) games where the player can grope female characters or ogle them. This goes beyond just "hey I like hot chicks so I put them in my game"].

Of Metal Gear's female characters I only think The Boss, EVA and Sniper Wolf could be considered not sexist imo. Sniper Wolf has the same degree of sexualization and backstory as the other MGS1 bosses, so I think she's okay. The Boss and EVA have strong characterization of their own and while EVA's outfit is ridiculous, I've seen enough of Big Boss's spandexed ass to know it goes both ways. Just assume I'm excluding them in the next statements I'll make.

One thing I've noticed is that, excluding the above, all of Metal Gear's female characters are sexy and young. This is in contrast to the male characters who have a full range of personality traits, including some who are sexy. But not all of them. The plot drivers are also all male, surprise surprise. I love The Boss, but she was there as a means of character development for Big Boss. I really would've liked to see that spinoff game starring her to really flesh her out more and make her stand on her own. The designs themselves I think could mostly be chalked up to preference, I don't have a major problem with them. This is besides Quiet's which is just so ridiculous. Some of the male designs equal the amount of sexualization in the ladies too. It's the treatment of the women which gets sketchy.

As far back as MGS1 you had multiple opportunities to see Meryl in just her underwear. She doesn't even show you consensually, you have to walk in on her changing or use the bathroom. I hope I don't have to explain how uncomfortable and creepy that seems. There's a whole required segment where you have to watch Meryl's ass to find her in a crowd which I don't think would've been done with any male characters.
Quiet has been explained multiple times in this thread so I won't go into it. Paz looks underage and is presented as underage so it's very creepy to see her in a bikini and be able to imply sexual acts in her date side mission. I know she's 20, but that's a cop-out. It's the same logic of "she's not 5 years old she's an 1000 year-old dragon!" Strangelove molests said implied underage character and pushes the whole predatory lesbian stereotype. You can make Rose's boobs jiggle in MGS4 if you shake the controller.

I can go on but I hope I've explained enough to show how much I don't approve of Kojima's treatment of the majority of his female characters. There's a way to have a good, sexy female character without being creepy and sexist, but he doesn't get it. I hope I'm not too off topic posting this!
Great post. And yes, I thought of the 1000-year-old dragon too. It's a total cop-out. Just like "she breathes through her skin". XD

i just found out he has a son and a wife. weird
I'm curious why you think this is weird. I hope you don't think sexist men never get married.
 
Last edited:

Bor Gullet

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
12,399
The thing with Kojima is even when he's a perv, he doesn't discriminate between male and female. In MGSV you can oggle at Quiet and look at Big Boss' buttcrack at the hospital.

In PW you can go on a date with Paz and Kaz in their speedos.
 

BossAttack

Member
Oct 27, 2017
42,954
Bond movies are incredibly sexist too, sometimes straight-up misogynistic even. Just repeating sexist tropes because they exist or "it's an homage" doesn't exempt one from the criticism. It's like having a blackface character in 2017 and saying "oh it's an homage to those old racist movies". My answer to that is: OK, and...? That's still racist. You probably do realize that, but I just want to point this out.

Of course, it's why I feel MGS3 works as a narrative because it intentionally flips these Bond tropes (especially the early 1960's ones) on their head. Those early Bond movies are literally straight up sexist, fucking Bond screws the gay out of Pussy Galore, like what!? But, MGS3 is smart enough to use the parts of those films that work while also turning that whole genre on its head. It ends with our "hero" getting duped by a sexy spy after being forced to kill his mother-figure all for a corrupt government that sold her out such that his award ceremony and "victory" feels hollow. His only recourse being to cry at the grave of his mentor/mother.
 

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
Bond movies are incredibly sexist too, sometimes straight-up misogynistic even. Just repeating sexist tropes because they exist or "it's an homage" doesn't exempt one from the criticism. It's like having a blackface character in 2017 and saying "oh it's an homage to those old racist movies". My answer to that is: OK, and...? That's still racist. You probably do realize that, but I just want to point this out.


So? Doesn't mean I can't comment on your meandering/rambling.

OK see, why do you think this is a worthwhile comment? You criticize my snark, but really, the only possible response to something as condescending is gonna be, um, "Ya think?" or "Thanks captain obvious". C'mon.

You're being dramatic. I can certainly think of "lowest forms of engagement" than snarky dismissal of bad arguments.

Anyway, if you're so interested in discussion, maybe focus on addressing the strawman I pointed out ("these two paragraphs are more about trying to illustrate how every single thing in life that involves female nudity/sexualisation is not instantly misogyny", you should realize that no one has argued this, so this means your two paragraphs were wasted on a arguing against nothing), instead of complaining about snark. Or you could address faircure's excellent rebuttals. It's weird that you think I'm too "hostile", but you still choose to respond to me, whereas faircure is responding without the slightest hint of snark and you're completely ignoring them. If you think I'm that hostile, then I suggest you ignore me, and respond to them instead.


Great post. And yes, I thought of the 1000-year-old dragon too. It's a total cop-out. Just like "she breathes through her skin". XD


I'm curious why you think this is weird. I hope you don't think sexist men never get married.

I did respond to faircure. If it's your style, it's your style, but I think you're making this too personal instead of arguing argument vs argument. I'm sure you'll understand dishing out snark left and right may just upset those you aim it at. I'm sure you'll just come back and say, well, some people deserve it, deal with it. You're arguing with actual people though Morrigan, not everyone you disagree with just needs to be shat on for effect. I will politely remind you again you quoted me in this topic, not me you. I have no desire to put you on ignore as I'll always accept a challenge for a debate, but kicking it off with some ad hominem and put-downs aren't going to have us begin a debate honestly. It may be you who needs to ignore me, to be honest, if you think my posts are such wastes of time, have a value of nothing and aren't worth you responding to in-depth, initially, without me trying to tease more out of you. You've clearly brought that feeling over from the other board, as you made me aware that you "know of" my long posts. So as I said, maybe time you ignore me if I'm just going to be seen as an outlet for you to be snide to.
 

faircure

Member
Oct 27, 2017
631
Great post. And yes, I thought of the 1000-year-old dragon too. It's a total cop-out. Just like "she breathes through her skin". XD

Thank you :D! It is almost funny what people come up with to justify female characters wearing nothing lol. I saw that Paz was a "representation of women who look younger than they are" somewhere else before.
 

Morrigan

Spear of the Metal Church
Member
Oct 24, 2017
34,315
I did respond to faircure. If it's your style, it's your style, but I think you're making this too personal instead of arguing argument vs argument. I'm sure you'll understand dishing out snark left and right may just upset those you aim it at. I'm sure you'll just come back and say, well, some people deserve it, deal with it. You're arguing with actual people though Morrigan, not everyone you disagree with just needs to be shat on for effect. I will politely remind you again you quoted me in this topic, not me you. I have no desire to put you on ignore as I'll always accept a challenge for a debate, but kicking it off with some ad hominem and put-downs aren't going to have us begin a debate honestly. It may be you who needs to ignore me, to be honest, if you think my posts are such wastes of time, have a value of nothing and aren't worth you responding to in-depth, initially, without me trying to tease more out of you. You've clearly brought that feeling over from the other board, as you made me aware that you "know of" my long posts. So as I said, maybe time you ignore me if I'm just going to be seen as an outlet for you to be snide to.
Well then. You have some nerve to accuse me of dishonesty when you're still complaining about my tone, and yet still not addressing anything I'm actually saying. And no, you didn't refute anything faircure said either.
 

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
Well then. You have some nerve to accuse me of dishonesty when you're still complaining about my tone, and yet still not addressing anything I'm actually saying. And no, you didn't refute anything faircure said either.

Just because someone in here didn't argue something doesn't mean I can't share my general thoughts. My thoughts weren't really quoted at anyone, just me sharing what I thought. I wasn't trying to refute faircure either, just engage with a reply. I actually agreed with some of their points around Quiet not speaking. People can walk away from a debate not changed in their views, but still have had a respectful backwards and forwards between each other. Faircure even finished their post with "I hope I made some sense here, I do appreciate your post and insight!".

Dishonesty in the way you began a conversation with me. You keep mentioning faircures post, they quoted me and started a conversation. If that post was what you felt, why couldn't you have spoken to me like that? Without throwing around mansplaining and then went to "some things never change" and "I'm aware of your long posts". Then all the remarks about being more concise, stop saying "nothing" and so on. You didn't appear to actually want to have a debate with me, just throw some stuff my way and make it clear what you think of me. That's what I mean. It wasn't a pleasant way to start a conversation, one which you started with me and clearly wanted me to respond to you. That kind of sucks Morrigan, believe it or not I've enjoyed reading quite a lot of your posts on that other board, but I just personally get the feeling you don't like me and nearly any time you quote me now it will just be to somehow let me know that. I'd rather we didn't head off on that footing, we can disagree on some things but still respect each other.
 
Last edited:

VaporSnake

Member
Oct 28, 2017
4,603
I just always figured the dude enjoyed the bachelor life, doesnt really seem like a family man but i guess he never really talks about his family much from what ive seen
MGS2 had a pretty weird moment where your Soliton Radar was replaced by home video footage of Kojimas wife, and I'm pretty sure she appears throughout the series in other ways as well, like magazine covers or something of that nature.
 

faircure

Member
Oct 27, 2017
631
I wasn't trying to refute faircure either, just engage with a reply. I actually agreed with some of their points around Quite not speaking.

I am curious what you thought of what I said about objectification though. Doesn't Kojima making the women in his games sex fantasies imply that's all he's reduced that character to and thus making them not equal to a man? That would fall under how you've defined misogyny.

You keep mentioning faircures post, they quoted me and started a conversation. If that post was what you felt, why couldn't you have spoken to me like that? Without throwing around mansplaining and then went to "some things never change" and "I'm aware of your long posts". Then all the remarks about being more concise, stop saying "nothing" and so on.

Honestly I think I've just been really really polite in how I post since I'm new around here and to this arguing thing, and I don't want to get on any bad sides. Morrigan is a little more to the point and I think that's okay.
I hope its not out of line for me to say I do think this argument is getting a little heated though!
 

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
I am curious what you thought of what I said about objectification though. Doesn't Kojima making the women in his games sex fantasies imply that's all he's reduced that character to and thus making them not equal to a man? That would fall under how you've defined misogyny.



Honestly I think I've just been really really polite in how I post since I'm new around here and to this arguing thing, and I don't want to get on any bad sides. Morrigan is a little more to the point and I think that's okay.
I hope its not out of line for me to say I do think this argument is getting a little heated though!

The characters are sexual objectification, yes, at least Quiet is. Some of his others too. This is where my bringing in of biology and psychology tried to go to lengths of explaining why visual sexual objectification is preferred by men, and therefore why you almost exclusively see sexualisation for men be visual. Find me male romance novels? You might see 1 for every 50 aimed at women. I know you know what 50 shades of grey is. Is that male sexual objectification for women? Yeah. Were those Diet Coke adverts visual sexualisation rather than written? Yeah. Does it mean the writer, E. L. James, doesn't see men and women as equal? No, not unless there is evidence. It is a work of fantasy made for the purpose of exciting/releasing dopamine/stimulating women's sexual desires/fantasies. Going from sexual objectification to you don't see men and women as equal misses out many reasons as to why sexualisation exists. Some of it is because "sex sells", most of it is because human beings enjoy being titillated, and you don't even need to be selling a product for that to be the case. Nothing is sold in dating apps, that was my point with bringing up Tinder. People seek out sex/sexualisation because it's a massive part of what humanity wants to meet our biological and psychological needs. I purposefully brought up the points of consent when talking about this for a reason, I shouldn't need to elaborate more why. I also tried to bring up confidence/sexual issues around anxiety/depression, because no, not everyone finds it easy to actually go out and get sexual partners. So some do end up turning to fantasy, whether it be acting in porn (yes I agree there is a huge debate about what porn can do to ill-educated minds, but that's another topic), or novels, or magazines, or tv shows/movies or... video game characters. Single people still seek out sexual desires.

That isn't to say sexualisation can't come from people who truly don't see men and women as equal. Hollywood is rife with that, no shit, as is many parts of the porn industry. Content created by people who truly don't see the sexes as equal, and will probably end up being part of a #metoo campaign. All I tried to argue was you cannot simply paint every single instance of sexual objectification to mean whoever the creator is, is a misogynist/doesn't see the sexes as equal. Nor does it mean there isn't a vast abundance, probably too much, of male service in many sectors, one of which is the gaming industry. Hence why I asked Morrigan above to also include my quotes where I agreed with her saying

"I mean... considering 90% of entertainment is filled to the brim with the male gaze, writing this in a thread about Quiet is truly one of the most tone-deaf things you've written. Surely you can see that."

I've never once argued that this industry isn't 90% for straight males by straight males. It is, and it's why people want more diversity in gaming, and less sexualisation. My arguments are more about understanding why humans are how they are, and how not every single instance of sexual objectification must mean misogyny/no respect for women/men. Morrigan has said multiple times in this topic, with certainty, Kojima doesn't respect women and is apparently a sexist married with children. Can Kojima be that, a man who doesn't respect women and is a sexist in a married relationship? Yes. Is he? Well, I can't say his video games mean 100% endorsement of seeing women not as equal to mean in the real world, and him being a sexist to his wife. Just in the same way as every author who writes fantasies around powerplay/BDSM/idealised sexual objectification isn't instantly someone who sees men and women as unequal in some way. It is often simply creative works made to cater to the innermost primal desires to be turned on/titillated/role play/fantasized/etc. All of which should always be done with care and consent, but the consent part is a bit different when applied to fictional characters as they... aren't real. Even in movies/tv shows you can depict and act out things that you wouldn't actually do in real life.

I see men and women as equal to each other, yet I will not be a hypocrite and try to say I don't enjoy sexualisation/tits and ass from time to time. Sometimes it gets thrust on me when I'm not expecting/wanting it, and yeah, Quiet was definitely like that. I can criticise that though, and Kojimas decisions, without going as far to say he doesn't respect women without evidence he truly doesn't. It honestly just comes across like Yoko Taro (Kojima does), a straight man who likes boobs and butts. Except Taro is honest about it. Honesty will always be respected more than Kojima's "shame and words" tweet.

Well, whatever your reasoning, it made your post easier to read and accept your disagreement with me.
 
Last edited:

Stryder

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,530
US
This is par for the course when it comes to a Kojima game. I have come to expect it, and it has always bothered me. I have stuck with the games and look forward to Death Stranding because of all the other aspects that come with a Kojima game.
 

faircure

Member
Oct 27, 2017
631
The characters are sexual objectification, yes, at least Quiet is. Some of his others too. This is where my bringing in of biology and psychology tried to go to lengths of explaining why visual sexual objectification is preferred by men, and therefore why you almost exclusively see sexualisation for men be visual. Find me male romance novels? You might see 1 for every 50 aimed at women. I know you know what 50 shades of grey is. Is that male sexual objectification for women? Yeah. Were those Diet Coke adverts visual sexualisation rather than written? Yeah. Does it mean the writer, E. L. James, doesn't see men and women as equal? No, not unless there is evidence. It is a work of fantasy made for the purpose of exciting/releasing dopamine/stimulating women's sexual desires/fantasies. Going from sexual objectification to you don't see men and women as equal misses out many reasons as to why sexualisation exists. Some of it is because "sex sells", most of it is because human beings enjoy being titillated, and you don't even need to be selling a product for that to be the case.

That isn't to say sexualisation can't come from people who truly don't see men and women as equal. Hollywood is rife with that, no shit, as is many parts of the porn industry. Content created by people who truly don't see the sexes as equal, and will probably end up being part of a #metoo campaign. All I tried to argue was you cannot simply paint every single instance of sexual objectification to mean whoever the creator is, is a misogynist/doesn't see the sexes as equal. Nor does it mean there isn't a vast abundance, probably too much, of male service in many sectors, one of which is the gaming industry. Hence why I asked Morrigan above to also include my quotes where I agreed with her saying

"I mean... considering 90% of entertainment is filled to the brim with the male gaze, writing this in a thread about Quiet is truly one of the most tone-deaf things you've written. Surely you can see that."

I've never once argued that this industry isn't 90% for straight males by straight males. It is, and it's why people want more diversity in gaming, and less sexualisation. My arguments are more about understanding why humans are how they are, and how not every single instance of sexual objectification must mean misogyny/no respect for women/men. Morrigan has said multiple times in this topic, with certainty, Kojima doesn't respect women and is apparently a sexist married with children. Can Kojima be that, a man who doesn't respect women and is a sexist in a married relationship? Yes. Is he? Well, I can't say his video games mean 100% endorsement of seeing women not as equal to mean in the real world, and him being a sexist to his wife. Just in the same way as every author who writes fantasies around powerplay/BDSM/idealised sexual objectification isn't instantly someone who sees men and women as unequal in some way.

I see men and women as equal to each other, yet I will not be a hypocrite and try to say I don't enjoy sexualisation/tits and ass from time to time. Sometimes it gets thrust on me when I'm not expecting/wanting it, and yeah, Quiet was definitely like that. I can criticise that though, and Kojimas decisions, without going as far to say he doesn't respect women without evidence he truly doesn't. It honestly just comes across like Yoko Taro (Kojima does), a straight man who likes boobs and butts. Except Taro is honest about it. Honesty will always be respected more than Kojima's "shame and words" tweet.

Well, whatever your reasoning, it made your post easier to read and accept your disagreement with me.

But all the examples you've brought up of sexualization are to sell something or erotica. Having sexy ladies in ads is to make it seem like the product being sold will make you popular with ladies, and erotica is all about sex so, obviously everyone in it will be objectified.

Metal Gear is a video game and its plot isn't about sex, it's about nuclear warfare, soldiers, private military, etc. etc. Still having the women in those games act like sexy ladies in Coke ads is sexism. If someone wants to make a raunchy sex game and has characters like Quiet in it, fine. But to keep characterizing women as sex objects in narratives about war and such is insulting. People are influenced by the characters in stories they like and I'm sure having women in games like Quiet has contributed to the attitudes of men in gaming.

And I have no problem with Yoko Taro's female characters for reasons I've said in my original post. Is 2B sexy? Yes, very and she fulfills the aspect of sex sells and titillation you've said men want in games. But 2B is also in control of what she does and drives the plot. Rather than being a sexy woman thrown into a plot just for the male gaze, she is a full-fledged character who drives the plot, has a personality, and just happens to also be sexy. 2B is a character first, sexualized second, and most of Kojima's women feel like they're here to be sexualized first, and part of the plot just as a secondhand effort.
 

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
But all the examples you've brought up of sexualization are to sell something or erotica. Having sexy ladies in ads is to make it seem like the product being sold will make you popular with ladies, and erotica is all about sex so, obviously everyone in it will be objectified.

Metal Gear is a video game and its plot isn't about sex, it's about nuclear warfare, soldiers, private military, etc. etc. Still having the women in those games act like sexy ladies in Coke ads is sexism. If someone wants to make a raunchy sex game and has characters like Quiet in it, fine. But to keep characterizing women as sex objects in narratives about war and such is insulting. People are influenced by the characters in stories they like and I'm sure having women in games like Quiet has contributed to the attitudes of men in gaming.

And I have no problem with Yoko Taro's female characters for reasons I've said in my original post. Is 2B sexy? Yes, very and she fulfills the aspect of sex sells and titillation you've said men want in games. But 2B is also in control of what she does and drives the plot. Rather than being a sexy woman thrown into a plot just for the male gaze, she is a full-fledged character who drives the plot, has a personality, and just happens to also be sexy. 2B is a character first, sexualized second, and most of Kojima's women feel like they're here to be sexualized first, and part of the plot just as a secondhand effort.

Kojima's games are rated as adult content, and they've since the start had depictions of sexual objectification and male orientated sexualisation. Primarily straight males. Kojima is obviously a straight man himself. He's arrogant and confident to the extent of pretty much saying MGS is HIS creation. Not that there is anything wrong with that in most senses, but it's an indicator he creates HIS vision, not a vision that others ask for. You literally are buying a Hideo Kojima game. Therefore, if there is something related to sex in it... it's going to be what caters to his fantasies. So, pretty (I say this in italics to highlight points I made earlier around self-esteem/confidence and beauty) straight women. It's what he finds desireable, and that isn't a definitive. Everyone has their own tastes and attractions and that is how the world should accept beauty.

As for him mixing in real political elements around war, yeah, he does. That probably is something that crosses over his audiences, I agree. There are things in the MGS universe that can appeal to all gamers, not just horny straight males, like say, a men's magazine would. This is still a series with vampires, supernatural powers, viruses from speech, mind-readers, nanomachines and other whacky shit. As I said, it's a Hideo Kojima game.

What I will say again, as I've said it already, is Quiet was his most in your face sexualisation in the whole series, hence part of the reason she gets soo much blowback. This is MGS5, not MGS1. It's picked up many players over the years, and some who might have been on their thresholds from the other entries. Quiet tips them over, and the tweet and PR drama before the release just bitters the taste. I agree. Honestly, I do. I think MGS5 is a shit game, primarily for the terrible story, but I do also agree Quiet is a bad character. Again in the big post above, expressing my thoughts on why sexual objectification exists, and asking for a bit more evidence an actual human being literally doesn't respect women/see them as equal, is an aside from agreeing Quiet is a bad character.

Choosing to make Quiet mute works with her name and story somewhat, but yes, it does make the character fall flat overall with what is attempted. The silent bad ass sniper does kind of work, but due to how paper thin MGS5's plot is, and how terrible most of the characters are, having an almost exclusively mute character thrown in just drags the whole thing down. I would still say Taro creates for sexiness first, or it's damn near the top. The guy is just honest about that, and that is what at least gets some respect.

Remember that this is the guy that responded to the butt controversy with

"Due to the 2B butt controversy, many outrageous drawings are being made. Collecting them to share individually is a pain. It would be great if we can group them together to make it easier to distribute them every week."

"When I said that I wanted people to gather images of 2B and put them in a zip file for me, the tweet got all kinds of exposure. Now people are actually collecting them. The internet is amazing."


While a lot of what he says is just in jest/joking around, it's the lack of "oh I have a deep reasoning for sexiness" that people don't get caught out with. Same thing with Bayonetta. Although the game obviously still has many call it out, and call out the artist who created Bayonetta... who isn't male. Anyway, the point is both Nier and Bayonetta didn't drum up the controversy Quiet did as neither had a creator who tried to push back at criticism saying people would be ashamed of their words. That was one of the biggest mistakes Kojima made, apart from creating a shitty character. I still stand by feeling to actually accuse someone of not seeing women and men as equals, and being a literal sexist/misogynist requires more evidence than they create scenarios with sexual objectification/sexualisation. As I feel there are many instances in life, and will continue to be, where content is created by decent people for the purposes of titillation/sexual desires. Finally, again, I agree there is too much of it in many industries and more diversity would be better, but people playing it safe/only catering to one audience doesn't mean those people are instantly shitty people. It means they are lacking creativity or not listening to the audience that says they want something different/better.

Death Stranding may not be MGS, but it will yet again be another Kojima game. Will there be some sort of sexualisation in it? Most certainly. As in your face as Quiet? Probably not, due to the criticism, but ultimately, for better or worse Kojima will be one of those creators who does what he wants. That's just what people get when they buy his games. You might think it makes him a hack as a creator, but again, accusations about his personal character and behaviour usually require evidence to be the case. I genuinely haven't heard anyone say he's been bad to work with, or in general. In fact, Geoff Keighley always talks highly of him and Geoff is a good guy.
 
Last edited:

beloved freak

Member
Oct 27, 2017
231
I didn't mind the boobs, but the stockings + thong were just silly. Even if you breathe through your skin, why would anybody wear that?? Bizarre.
 

Just_a_Mouse

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,030
I will admit that the gifs I have seen posted (Quiet in the helicopter, rolling playfully on the ground, etc) are enough to keep me away from this game, sadly. I currently live with my sister and wouldn't feel comfortable playing that with her in the room, she doesn't game and I don't need her thinking I'm watching softcore porn in her house.
 

shimon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,578
I will admit that the gifs I have seen posted (Quiet in the helicopter, rolling playfully on the ground, etc) are enough to keep me away from this game, sadly. I currently live with my sister and wouldn't feel comfortable playing that with her in the room, she doesn't game and I don't need her thinking I'm watching softcore porn in her house.

I'm sorry but that made me lol quite hard :)
 

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
I'm sorry but that made me lol quite hard :)

If you get it on the PC you can do this

ELq3EU.gif


PC wins lol. Just a mouse get the PC release! The gameplay in MGS5 is the best in the series. Just ignore the story which is unfinished presumably due to Konami wanting the game out. I genuinely believe a whole act is missing. I didn't see the twist coming either, but I also didn't like it.

Maybe Death Stranding will get a PC release eventually. It'll probably be a PS5 launch release at this rate. Maybe a generation cross-over release. For PS4 and PS5. Or if it beats the PS5 releasing, I'm sure it will get a port to it.
 

riotous

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,325
Seattle
Man that's pretty bad lol; my wife loves this kind of stuff though. I get why it's called "male gaze" but where do females who like this stuff fit in? Maybe just not relevant enough to counter the term "male gaze"?
 

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
Man that's pretty bad lol; my wife loves this kind of stuff though. I get why it's called "male gaze" but where do females who like this stuff fit in? Maybe just not relevant enough to counter the term "male gaze"?

What do you mean by fit in? Some will enjoy it visually, but for others it's about emulating. As in cosplay. As I said earlier look at the amount of cosplayers that go for the characters that get the most flak for sexualisation. If you Google Quiet, Bayonetta or 2B cosplay there are hundreds of results. If these characters didn't exist it would be some other similar characters. Fran from FF12 can be quite popular too.

Women unsurprisingly enjoy feeling sexy, and one way of feeling so can be role-playing "sexy" characters. I put that in quotes as again, personal interests can differ, but obviously many of us understand why revealing outfits, or tight outfits, or those that highlight the body in some way can feel the most empowering if you are comfortable with them. It's linked to sexual display, again, having biological and psychological ties. Sure, some people simply like the characters, but often sexual outfits or clothing is about feeling and looking sexy.

That doesn't mean cosplayers deserve to be treated any less respectfully than any other women. Unfortunately, harassment does follow many of them with idiots who can't behave properly. Don't stare either regardless of how attractive or sexy you find someone.
 

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
She enjoys it visually an finds it hot. Basically how do women who are attracted to women fit in with the term "male gaze"?

I have no idea as I don't personally use the term male gaze. Unwanted or intrusive staring is just something I'd class as rude at best, potentially harassment if you're intruding on a personal/private space with your eyes.

Content created with straight men in mind can still be found sexy by women. Everyone probably knows some female who in their own words appreciate what they think is a good looking female. It doesn't necessarily mean you are bisexual or a lesbian either. I guess it's just being open and honest about what your eyes and brain find attractive.

The same can happen for guys too. Of course, be prepared for a torrent of abuse that you are gay if you ever dare say that guy looks sharp.

It's just one human saying another human looks good. It doesn't necessarily mean there is a sexual, physical or romantic attraction. As men are largely visually stimulated, it shouldn't really surprise anyone women can look to other women for inspiration or opinions on looking and feeling sexy. By the way that's not me implying she wants to look like Quiet. It can just be as simple as she likes how Quiet looks. Quiet is modelled after a... model.
 

riotous

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,325
Seattle
I have no idea as I don't personally use the term male gaze. Unwanted or intrusive staring is just something I'd class as rude at best, potentially harassment if you're intruding on a personal/private space with your eyes.

Well it's used to describe video games, movies and the like a lot (and was used in this thread a few times). You can't harass your TV screen.

Obviously staring in real life is gross, but not sure that is relevant to this video game.
 

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
Well it's used to describe video games, movies and the like a lot (and was used in this thread a few times). You can't harass your TV screen.

Obviously staring in real life is gross, but not sure that is relevant to this video game.

Well, no, which is why there is some nuance around make believe/fantasy/role play. None of that necessarily says without a doubt how you behave in real life/to real people. Sometimes it can be an indication, but an indication isn't an exact science. It's often an assumption, especially around sexual fantasy as I'll link below.

It's my understanding the male written for the 50 shades novels is a bit of an... asshole. It's presumably a power play fantasy though, which is a real thing many engage in but don't necessarily actually want 100% carried out in the real world.

I mean, if you can stomach reading this article below and not just write it off as not true because of the content you can begin to understand some of the extremities around fantasy/role play and the human mind. Fantasy/thought doesn't necessarily mean endorsement and actually wanting outside of said fantasy.

In recent studies, more than 90 percent of women admit having had sexual fantasies, and depending on the study, some one-third to two-thirds confess at least occasional fantasies of being forced into sex. Of course, sexual assault is a horrible violation. Why would any sane woman fantasize about it? A recent study suggests that rape fantasies are most prevalent among women who are the most erotically open and adventurous, who feel most comfortable daydreaming about sexual situations way beyond what they'd ever want to experience.

This study was far from the first to attempt to understand why some women have rape fantasies.

Decades ago, psychologists believed that dreams and fantasies (daydreams) were subconscious wishes, therefore, women who had rape fantasies actually wanted to be coerced into sex. That view has been thoroughly debunked. Fantasies don't necessarily reflect wishes. Among those in long-term relationships, one of the most common fantasies is sex with someone else, even when the daydreamer is happy in the relationship and has no real desire to jump into another bed. Plenty of men fantasize saving damsels in distress without the slightest real wish to face a raging fire on the 23rd floor. Wishing plays a role in some fantasies, notably dreams of striking it rich or losing weight, but having an erotic fantasy in no way means you want it to come true.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-about-sex/201508/why-do-women-have-rape-fantasies

The above really does go into some extreme territory around thoughts. We are discussing Kojima though who often has it written he 100% does not respect women and/or is sexist/a misogynist based around sexual objectification and fantasy that doesn't go as extreme as above. It really is just Kojima subjecting the player to what he finds sexy and attractive in his role play. As I said a few times I think there needs to be better evidence as an actual person, Kojima seriously treats women poorly or disrespects them. You can both criticise Kojima's fantasies, choices and what not, whilst detaching yourself from saying it must mean he's a piece of shit in the real world, unless there is more compelling evidence he is.
 
Last edited:

StallionDan

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
7,705
It just comes across as the words of someone who feels guilty and is trying to explain his way out of Drop the "Words and Deeds" nonsense, ignore the "has to be naked to breathe through her skin (despite the fact that The End from MGS3 has similar circumstances and is fully clothed except his head) explanation"

Breathing through skin is silly, but The End comparisons are not good, The End didn't get his lungs burned to shit and he could breathe normally.
 
Oct 25, 2017
9,006
Canada
Well it's used to describe video games, movies and the like a lot (and was used in this thread a few times). You can't harass your TV screen.

Obviously staring in real life is gross, but not sure that is relevant to this video game.

The male gaze ins't referring to or criticizing the viewer. To my understanding, it's discussing the directors intent, that the product was created for the hetero-male eyes, regardless of who else may also glace at the media.
 

eyeball_kid

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,227
And I have no problem with Yoko Taro's female characters for reasons I've said in my original post. Is 2B sexy? Yes, very and she fulfills the aspect of sex sells and titillation you've said men want in games. But 2B is also in control of what she does and drives the plot. Rather than being a sexy woman thrown into a plot just for the male gaze, she is a full-fledged character who drives the plot, has a personality, and just happens to also be sexy. 2B is a character first, sexualized second, and most of Kojima's women feel like they're here to be sexualized first, and part of the plot just as a secondhand effort.

Quiet was always in control of what she did as well. She choose to stay or leave, to kill or not kill, based on her own reasons and agenda. Quiet is hard to reconcile, because on one hand she is a fierce, stubborn, independent woman who is conflicted in her motivations and allegiances. There's some complexity there. And I actually think it was an interesting experiment to have a character that only communicates to other characters through physical actions and subtle glances, though it didn't always work well. On the other hand, Kojima often presented her more as a sex doll than a woman.
 

riotous

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,325
Seattle
The male gaze ins't referring to or criticizing the viewer. To my understanding, it's discussing the directors intent, that the product was created for the hetero-male eyes, regardless of who else may also glace at the media.

Yeah I guess I understand that; and I certainly think that's Kojima's intent. And I understand that it contributes ot an atmosphere that turns a lot fo females off to gaming; we just need more variety though and I think it would not be a "problem", but merely content certain people could just avoid. The lack of normal/non sexualized depictions is the greater issue.
 
Oct 25, 2017
9,006
Canada
Yeah I guess I understand that; and I certainly think that's Kojima's intent. And I understand that it contributes ot an atmosphere that turns a lot fo females off to gaming; we just need more variety though and I think it would not be a "problem", but merely content certain people could just avoid. The lack of normal/non sexualized depictions is the greater issue.

Yea, more AAA games designed to appeal to different audiences would be awesome.
 

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
The male gaze ins't referring to or criticizing the viewer. To my understanding, it's discussing the directors intent, that the product was created for the hetero-male eyes, regardless of who else may also glace at the media.

Isn't the term male gaze usually used to signify a negative though? I can't say I've ever heard anyone use it positively, or even pragmatically around an intent. By that I mean as a definition of something like the below (copied from an article I linked to earlier I have no idea if anyone read)

To begin with, it's essential to note that the literature specifically studying men's arousal patterns (gay as well as straight) has repeatedly emphasized their sensitivity to visual cues. As soon as the lust-inspiring image registers in their brain, they become turned-on—not only physically but psychologically, too. Exposure to such erotic stimuli immediately activates the parts of their brain related to getting an erection. And, as Ogas and Gaddam suggest, "Men's greater sex drive may be partially due to the fact that their sexual motivation pathways have more connections to the subcortical reward system than in women" [or, in short] "men's brains are designed to objectify females." Frustrated women have frequently (and cynically) complained that men's brains are located between their legs. But the authors' more scientifically grounded viewpoint seeks to elucidate the strategic—and frankly, unwilled—connection between the male's brain and his genitals. (See also an earlier two-part post of mine called "The Testosterone Curse.")

It's therefore no coincidence that many adult sites targeting men zero in on body parts. Ogas and Gaddam (as the computational neuroscientists that they are) cite Fantasti.cc to point out that of their 100 top-rated images no fewer than 23 exhibit close-ups of female anatomy without a face. Although, unquestionably, the dehumanizing implications of such calculated cropping are saddening, many of the authors' characterizations are nonetheless laugh-worthy. For instance, alluding to one website's presentation of female body parts, they observe: "The site looks like a Victoria's Secret catalog passed through a paper shredder." And they're forced to conclude (lament?) that "men's brains scrutinize the details of arousing visuals with the kind of concentration jewelers apply to the cut of a diamond" (p. 47).

Ogas and Gaddam continually make observations about male sexual desire that indirectly suggest the perpetual war between the sexes—unless, I would add, that at some point both men and women realize that however at variance their sexual instincts may be, they are just that—instincts. If, as the authors state, a virile man's libido can instantly be set off by one or more visual cues—that, in turn, compel him to take direct (i.e., orgasm-related) action, then how could he not view women as vehicles of (or receptacles for) his unruly lust? Surely, none of this animal-like behavior warrants being viewed as admirable. Still, the evolutionary imperative so deeply embedded in a male's organism—the demand that his attention be focused on what's linked to perpetuating the species—makes such innate impulses, if not laudatory, at least sympathetically understandable.

Additionally, the authors talk about male desire as "a solitary affair." That is, the single-minded pursuit of sexual arousal can exist totally independent of a relationship. "Getting off" as such has precious little to do with emotional intimacy. A man can sit alone, half-mesmerized before his computer screen, as he intently clicks on images and videos in his hunt for what will immediately ignite his libido.

Unlike his female counterpart, he gives little or no thought to actually sharing his erotic predilections or experiences with friends. And searching for stimuli that will engender or enhance sexual excitement (and ultimately create a most pleasurable dopaminerelease) is quite apart from any tender feelings, or craving for a genuinely intimate human attachment. Literally—and symbolically—it's masturbatory: sex for one. When in the next post I take up female sexual desire, I'll show how women are far less turned on by erotic images than by particular kinds of relationships(as they're typically dramatized, or exaggerated, in romance novels). Such fictive relationships can inflame their imagination with a strange sort of romanticism—however outrageous or hazardous their fantasies might be (at its extreme, think blood-sucking, yet love-stricken, vampires).

The cartoon metaphor used by Ogas and Gaddam to depict the male brain's desire software is, of all people, Elmer Fudd (!)—the comically ludicrous "wabbit hunter." To the authors, Fudd is "solitary, quick to arouse, goal-targeted, driven to hunt . . . and a little foolish" (p. 61). In other words, two-dimensional: the very emblem of a man whose "trigger-happy" brain forever resides between his legs. But with Fudd it's his rifle, not his phallus, that propels him ever forward. Eternally outmaneuvered by the ingenious Bugs Bunny, he yet resolutely reloads, time after time awaiting his next chance to shoot at his targeted prey. And the way the male sexual brain is constituted (as long, that is, as testosterone levels remain sufficiently high, or one's personal, non-sexual ideals are suspended), the pursuit of sexual stimulation remains undiscouraged and unfaltering. One might almost say, indomitable.

If it were used pragmatically to describe something like the above which is rooted in science/biology/psychology I'd have an easier time finding it less confusing. What I would see as a negative would be how I described staring, or looking at situations you shouldn't be, which would be harassment/privacy invasion. Which is why I wondered if the above poster meant that, to which they did spawn another good conversation around how staring at your TV isn't quite the same as staring at a real person.

Maybe it's really the Elmer Fudd gaze lol.
 
Last edited:

AnansiThePersona

Started a revolution but the mic was unplugged
Member
Oct 27, 2017
15,682
I started out being disguised with Quiet upon her joining me and told myself I wasn't gonna use her. Middle way through the game I started using her but still disliked her character. It's creepy how much the camera and the game ogles her and it constantly put me off. Although by the end of her story arc she grew on me and I kinda liked her a bit.
 
Oct 25, 2017
9,006
Canada
Isn't the term male gaze usually used to signify a negative though?
Yes, also I haven't studied this and I'd appreciate if someone who has would chip in.

I guess technically the male gaze in a vacuum might not entirely be a negative.

The issue as I understand it, is when the majority of media is framed from the male gaze. That it promotes male as the default and dominant position, where women are forced to watch films from the male lens. It presents the woman as an object and the man in a position of power, the gazer. It's harmful to society if it's the only thing being presented on media. Really basic stuff like the Bechdel test shows that female characters in film are often without agency, and simply plot devices or objects of gaze.

I could be horribly wrong on my framing of this.
 

Boney

Member
Oct 28, 2017
349
Santiago
I'm going through this now as well and knowing that she's basically there to striptease on the helicopter, I killed her inmediatly when I encountered her (didn't know this was an option) and I don't regret it one bit. I'm actually glad I could just erase her from the game considering how off putting she is.
 

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
Yes, also I haven't studied this and I'd appreciate if someone who has would chip in.

I guess technically the male gaze in a vacuum might not entirely be a negative.

The issue as I understand it, is when the majority of media is framed from the male gaze. That it promotes male as the default and dominant position, where women are forced to watch films from the male lens. It presents the woman as an object and the man in a position of power, the gazer. It's harmful to society if it's the only thing being presented on media. Really basic stuff like the Bechdel test shows that female characters in film are often without agency, and simply plot devices or objects of gaze.

I could be horribly wrong on my framing of this.

If the definition is a mixture of scientific backing, and also a descriptor of camera angles, or the Elmer Fudd approach to satisfying a male viewer even if the whole shot is just boobs talking (as in you can hear talking but the screen is just zoomed in on boobs), then yeah, I understand a bit better what is attempted to be described with the two words.

I would say like most things it would have negatives and positives. Obviously the largest schism being potentially alienating audience members by obsessively pandering to one strict target. Maybe that even being in situations that really don't call for "tits!". By all means if we want to talk film and TV, yeah, like video games, "90%" of any sort of sexualisation will probably be for straight men. Or the women who enjoy other "sexy" women (the poster aboves wife who likes Quiet) without feeling alienated.

Most of my posts were never aimed to discredit that there is an over saturation of content for the perceived default viewer, the man who likes women, but trying to throw out some deeper understandings of why that man potentially ended up being the default target. My generic long term answer to that would be trying to involve more people in content creation that aren't simply men creating for men, and yes, in some occasions asking creators to consider being more creative rather than risk averse. Not simply an attempt to completely eradicate sexualisation, as that's neither going to happen nor is it healthy. That's what I meant earlier when I said both men and women require fantasy/sexualisation/stimulation.

Sending out completely hostile or negative remarks and words about all of this potentially doesn't help the minds of the men the articles above state naturally feel catered for by visual stimulation. I think this is why some men end up responding negatively to people they feel aren't just asking for a bit more diversity, but almost want to infer "every" man who enjoys anything visual must openly or secretly be sexist and mysoginistic. My stance is that always requires a bit more evidence than basing it on fantasy/role play/liking nudity of the sex they are attracted to. As I also tried to state earlier fantasies aren't necessarily endorsement of what you want in real life.

I don't think anyone actually thinks a sniper who breathes through their skin might be their next partner... lol. Except Kojima, maybe. Then again as I also said Kojima's games are strictly his visions and fantasies. Probably more so than any other games developer out there. He does have that arrogance around his work, for better or worse. You buy a Kojima game and you're getting a Kojima game. He caters to himself, and it just depends on whether or not you as an individual align enough with his tastes to enjoy the work he puts out. Whereas many other developers are far more open to feedback or concerned with reaching a wide audience.

Kojima is almost like the guys version of a vampire romance novel series. It's the series with the super powered main protagonist who takes down whole armies, let alone Mechs, and has "sexy" women either in his team or he's going after them as enemies. The whole series has been a male power fantasy from day 1. Save the world, get the girls, or be around the girls. As I did say earlier though, Quiet is the most in your face he's got, so some of whatever crossing over audience members MGS has picked up for being an interesting series really did feel it was just too much with 5. Even some of the default target audience, the straight men, didn't really get on board with Quiet. Besides those that get embarrassed their mum might come into their room when playing MGS5.

Maybe it's why I loved MGS4. You played as Old Snake. A departure from young, fit and athletic Snake. Although, Old Snake obviously still kicked ass and regardless of his age (yeah I know he wasn't really that old, but visually he came across as really old) there's plenty of male orientated sexualisation in MGS4. It's in every Kojima game. I don't personally think it makes him a bad person, or deserving of some of the accusations without evidence. He just has a very self-centered one track mind and won't stray far from what he likes when creating his visions. Save the world war fantasies that are peppered with his fantasised tastes in women and all the other weird shit he thinks up. I know someone might say/think, but he's married? Well, one of the blog posts I quoted earlier around fantasies points out one of the most thought of fantasies is having sex with someone else even if you are in a relationship you are happy in and feel loved. Such is the human mind, but people also understanding fantasies aren't necessarily what you actually want in real life.

Some content creators simply let us in on their fantasies, while many of us keep them to our dreams and maybe some close friends. I'm sure most people have had quite a few why did I even dream or think of that thoughts. It's natural. Crazy people like Kojima just seem to write their dreams into a script and sell them to us as a game!
 
Last edited:

TyrantII

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,365
Boston
I don't like her. Kojima is really shitty for pulling this garbage. Could have been a neat character, but all I can see is a sex toy.

Yup. It's wierd that someone that created Eva / The Boss went on to pull this.

Maybe it was because MGS was the only canvas he had that he just threw it in because he wasn't going to get another project to try something different in, but boy it didn't work.

There's not even any higher level commentary to it. It's here's some T&A to oogle.
 
Oct 25, 2017
9,006
Canada
If the definition is a mixture of scientific backing, and also a descriptor of camera angles, or the Elmer Fudd approach to satisfying a male viewer even if the whole shot is just boobs talking (as in you can hear talking but the screen is just zoomed in on boobs), then yeah, I understand a bit better what is attempted to be described with the two words.

I would say like most things it would have negatives and positives. Obviously the largest schism being potentially alienating audience members by obsessively pandering to one strict target. Maybe that even being in situations that really don't call for "tits!". By all means if we want to talk film and TV, yeah, like video games, "90%" of any sort of sexualisation will probably be for straight men. Or the women who enjoy other "sexy" women (the poster aboves wife who likes Quiet) without feeling alienated.

Most of my posts were never aimed to discredit that there is an over saturation of content for the perceived default viewer, the man who likes women, but trying to throw out some deeper understandings of why that man potentially ended up being the default target. My generic long term answer to that would be trying to involve more people in content creation that aren't simply men creating for men, and yes, in some occasions asking creators to consider being more creative rather than risk averse. Not simply an attempt to completely eradicate sexualisation, as that's neither going to happen nor is it healthy. That's what I meant earlier when I said both men and women require fantasy/sexualisation/stimulation.

Sending out completely hostile or negative remarks and words about all of this potentially doesn't help the minds of the men the articles above state naturally feel catered for by visual stimulation. I think this is why some men end up responding negatively to people they feel aren't just asking for a bit more diversity, but almost want to infer "every" man who enjoys anything visual must openly or secretly be sexist and mysoginistic. My stance is that always requires a bit more evidence than basing it on fantasy/role play/liking nudity of the sex they are attracted to. As I also tried to state earlier fantasies aren't necessarily endorsement of what you want in real life.

I don't think anyone actually thinks a sniper who breathes through their skin might be their next partner... lol. Except Kojima, maybe. Then again as I also said Kojima's games are strictly his visions and fantasies. Probably more so than any other games developer out there. He does have that arrogance around his work, for better or worse. You buy a Kojima game and you're getting a Kojima game. He caters to himself, and it just depends on whether or not you as an individual align enough with his tastes to enjoy the work he puts out. Where as many other developers are far more open to feedback or concerned with reaching a wide audience.

I'd love to have more of this conversation but I'm actually working on a paper tonight and I feel like you're getting more writing done than I am right now. I do agree with a lot of what you've said. I'll get back to you if this conversation is still going after I'm finished.

Also, I'd agree being hostile isn't great, although I think people often interpret broad statements as derogatory assertions about their own character. I wasn't trying to be overly negative, if I came off that way.

As a small response to your last paragraph, I think Kojima is fine on his own. I think the issue is a that there are too many Kojimas (don't take this out of context) and not enough differing voices in the industry. I sat back and tried to think of female game directors and all that came to me was Amy Hennig and Roberta Williams. I think catering solely to men because they are the major audience in video games is a self fulfilling prophecy.
This came up on Wikipedia and it's not uplifting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_women_in_the_video_game_industry
 

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
I'd love to have more of this conversation but I'm actually working on a paper tonight and I feel like you're getting more writing done than I am right now. I do agree with a lot of what you've said. I'll get back to you if this conversation is still going after I'm finished.

Also, I'd agree being hostile isn't great, although I think people often interpret broad statements as derogatory assertions about their own character. I wasn't trying to be overly negative, if I came off that way.

As a small response to your last paragraph, I think Kojima is fine on his own. I think the issue is a that there are too many Kojimas (don't take this out of context) and not enough differing voices in the industry. I sat back and tried to think of female game directors and all that came to me was Amy Hennig and Roberta Williams. I think catering solely to men because they are the major audience in video games is a self fulfilling prophecy.
This came up on Wikipedia and it's not uplifting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_women_in_the_video_game_industry

You won't find me disagree there. Even with equality of opportunity it may never be 50/50 as that can't always happen in every industry, but it's more than apparent females make up many gamers. Therefore, you'd expect more representation in the development field of gaming.

Quite shitty seeing Hennigs luck as of late, but hopefully she can bounce back. It would be good to see more female leads and studios with female developers. As I said I won't disagree gaming is still largely a male dominated industry, even although when it comes to actual gamers there is more females out there than there may have been many years ago.

That was bound to happen as gaming got rid of some of its earlier shackles that only young boys played video games. Now nearly everyone plays video games of some sorts. Even if it's just on a mobile. Although, sure, there's still lots of stereotyping that gaming is for kids.

There seems to be a post here with lots of stats to digest around female representation with gaming

https://quanticfoundry.com/2017/01/19/female-gamers-by-genre/

Regardless of any conclusions it tries to draw on actual gamers, when it comes to the development industry it is still soo ridiculously one sided.
 
Last edited:

NightShift

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,999
Australia
Everything about Quiet was the worst thing Kojima has done to the MGS series. Ignoring her design and "words and deeds", she is a shitty character who adds nothing of worth to the story. Sniper Wolf and Eva where still eye candy but at least they were great characters on their own. I even started to appreciate the Beauty and the Beast unit after Quiet.
 

WoollyTitan

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
558
The Maldovarium
You'll grow to like her. Her characterization is slow, but doubtless she grows on you at the end. As for her physical depiction, so what? Did anyone's eyeballs fall out of their sockets? No. Well then.