I remember when I bought Metal Gear Solid 3 back in 2004, my mom had to be there with you to get her permission.
Granted MGS usually only had mild cursing so I dunno.
-
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.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Sexualized video games are not causing harm to male or female players, according to new research
- Thread starter Firmament1
- Start date
- Status
I remember when I bought Metal Gear Solid 3 back in 2004, my mom had to be there with you to get her permission.
Granted MGS usually only had mild cursing so I dunno.
OP
OP
This would be rad, I agree
See, this is exactly what I meant about my intentions being misconstrued. The point isn't that it's not worth criticizing, or having a discussion about sexualization in media, but rather, about how these criticisms are framed.
Anyway, now that you've brought it up, it might not be a bad idea to just avoid this thread altogether.
Last edited:
Back when I worked at GameStop, sometimes I'd see a nine or ten-year-old try to convince his mom to buy him GTA4 and I'd be like "you...you know what this game is about, right?"
It was pretty great to get an omega death glare from a fucking elementary schooler trying to convince his clueless parent to buy him GTA. Of course, then there were the parents who didn't give a shit at all, and that was even more of a bummer.
The purpose of a meta-analysis is to take multiple low-quality studies and synthesize them into a high-quality study by performing statistical techniques to aggregate their data.
When the author mentions that the source studies are low quality, it is not intended to be a caveat. It is intended to explain why a meta-analysis is warranted. Where you should apply scrutiny is in whether the studies included in the analysis are a representative sample and which statistical techniques were used.
It's less that and more, "It's okay to have boobs in video games you guys, because it's not causing any sort of immediate, physical damage".
Which was never the point and no one other than right wing talking heads ever tried to argue otherwise.
I like how you addressed that part but not the other part of my post, making it look like that's the case even more lmao even if you didn't mean it to.
like there's no way to get around that, you just posted that out of the blue on here, people are going to ask who's been arguing about sexualiation like that on here particularly, it's going to be a question people want to ask because people subtweet about other people on this forum all the time! Especially in regards to this topic.
Okay, that takes sense. Thank for that. Headline seems to bury the lead on this.
"How to get the side eye even harder: A 4 page post ed hypothesis".
facts on God
Help! My Brothers Become a Sexual Deviant
Volumes 1-5 coming soon to Barnes & Noble
no they're causing plenty of harm to the people who play games in the line of sight of their parents / children.. /s
I honestly do not think there is anything else that can be done than trying to enlighten parents about media and to properly educate children about safe and consensual sex and damage that crossing those boundaries will cause in real life. While I definitely think that media and video game industry should steer away from sexualized presentations of women, I find it hard to imagine a future where creation of horny content as whole would be culturally shunned.
LOL the hotlink to guitar center coupon codes at the bottom.
seriously though, i mean you're making the definition of a strawman argument. Once the full study is released there will be plenty to say about the actual conclusions itself without attacking the author, as ridiculous as he appears.
Yes, because the ratings on the box DEFINITELY keep younger people from buying them. Just like I'm sure 18+ buttons on porn sites DEFINITELY stop kids from looking.
Either you're very naive or you're stealthily trying to defend overly sexualize nonsense in games.
How would I know what kids today are doing? I haven't been a kid in 20 years
This is how I feel. Sexist shitheads playing these games are obviously going to be sexist shitheads, but playing and enjoying these games is not going to inherently turn someone into a sexist shithead if they already know right-from-wrong.
The rabbit hole is much more complex imo. Like maybe someone plays Xenoblade 2 and enjoys it, sees people complaining about the game on twitter, sees a recommended youtube video about how SJW complainers are ruining videogames, then that connects to the ben shapiro, jordan peterson, joe rogan pipeline.
I can absolutely see the value in such a thing but that assumes the end result of meta-analysis itself is actually always high quality itself no? The goal is a high quality study but that doesn't mean it actually will be one. Not to mention, even ignoring the quality of the study the author himself acknowledges that it's still an extremely small area of study and there have been many times where studies with minimal data/small experiment group lead to some wild conclusions that make headlines? Especially because the way it's framed as "new research" by the article which most people would assume to be an actual new study vs a meta-analysis (I get that it technically is and is maybe not the author's fault but it feels a little disingenuous).
LOL, I 100% admit that I'm dunking on him but I don't think it's entirely a strawman argument. The ways that one chooses present and conduct themselves can have an impact how credible they appear to be when they claim to speak from a position of authority.
Must be, because there's a very common and well understood link between sexualisation of femininity, women and girls in media and the impact it has on women and girls. So to boldly claim that video games manage to avoid this is an eyebrow raiser, especially when past studies by orgs like the APA included video games in their media analysis.
I feel like anyone who knows right-from-wrong will be smart enough to understand that people are allowed to have their issues with the designs and the alt-right pipeline is something to avoid.
Really it just depends on who the person playing the game is, which I'm sure most of us could've concluded without research
It would be better to phrase the title as "study finds no evidence for claim that…" rather than making a claim that there is no harm done.
Just a general tip for reporting research findings.
Just a general tip for reporting research findings.
This is part of the much larger problem with how recommendations work, both for Youtube and especially social media platforms like Twitter.
It feels like plenty of gamers are still all riled up about media scandals about video game content from decades ago, and feel like accepting any criticism of that content means that Jack Thompson won.
Yeah totally. This something that happens with 10-15 year olds more than anything.
Lol perfect case. I played the first DOA extreme. Not because of girls in skimpy bikinis. But liked the volleybal and one of my fav tracks loving you by minnie ripperton.
Was so damn relaxing the vibe.
credibility is only one part of a larger argument. I mean, i agree with you. This just isn't an actual refutation of his meta-analysis
lol. I mean you had hundreds of studies successfully evidencing this in wider pop culture(movies, television, advertising, etc) for decades but somehow videogames are immune and cause no harm in pushing those stereotypes?
doubt.jpg
doubt.jpg
So clearly the quality of this meta-analysis doesn't seem to be very good and on a cursory glance the individual is sort of suspect. I will say I think that where a lot of this debate gets hard for people is just, kind of in the same trap this person's meta-analysis falls into, the ways you study and observe this sort of phenomenon compared to "do video games cause violence?" is extremely different and I think that trips a lot of people up. Whether video games cause violence at the end of the day is a pretty clear and concise claim that you can empirically measure and observe, and whether or not "sexualized video games" cause some sort of subtle lasting psychological change is not measurable and viewable in the same obvious way and varies a lot from person to person. It's just a harder and more nebulous debate to get people to understand.
It is pretty hard to pinpoint the impact of a single element of a widespread issue. Sexism isn't exclusive to video games, it is extraordinarily pervasive across every type of media (and society as a whole). The medium isn't necessarily inflicting new harm, but instead, reinforcing the same inequalities that have been prevalent for centuries.
But I guess it is a "moral panic" to want our media to stop treating women like objects who exist purely for sexual gratification, right? The author can fuck right off with that shit.
But I guess it is a "moral panic" to want our media to stop treating women like objects who exist purely for sexual gratification, right? The author can fuck right off with that shit.
A videogame can be sexist. I don't need a study to come to that conclusion. The bullets in a virtual world are not real. The images and representations of that world are the same as ours.
It's been a long time but I'm pretty sure MGS3 had a torture scene, sexual abuse, and lots of gore, so that would make sense to me.
This. And in a way it is causing me physical harm because I can't tell you how much I eye rolled looking at Lost Ark's walking animation on female characters.
Dude unironically moans about wokism, Critical Race Theory, calls the anti-racism movement in 2020 a moral panic and that narratives on race are mistaken, believes hate crimes are rare in the US, thinks free speech is being ruined because universities aren't allowing bigots to talk, supports Rowling and pushes transphobic rhetoric.
Yet I'm supposed to think his study comes from a place of earnest when the outcome is to boldly claim that actually, sexualisation of women and girls in games isn't an issue.
Yet I'm supposed to think his study comes from a place of earnest when the outcome is to boldly claim that actually, sexualisation of women and girls in games isn't an issue.
It isn't about harm, but alienation.
Also, treating males as actual characters while all of the females are half-naked thinly-written gratuituously over-sexualised caricatures is ridiculous in its own right.
Also, treating males as actual characters while all of the females are half-naked thinly-written gratuituously over-sexualised caricatures is ridiculous in its own right.
A meticulously inaccurate way of framing sexism and misogyny in order to ensure the conclusion is that "sexualisation isn't bad," "anyone who complains is just attacking video games" and "this is just moral panic."
Whether this was deliberate on the author's part or genuine ignorance, now look, there's a study to link to the next time someone wants to attack criticism on representation of female characters, how convenient!
Whether this was deliberate on the author's part or genuine ignorance, now look, there's a study to link to the next time someone wants to attack criticism on representation of female characters, how convenient!
- Status