The Witcher 3: Misogyny in my video game? More likely than you think

aiswyda

Member
Aug 11, 2018
2,762
So I decided to finally try out the Witcher 3 after hearing pretty much everyone and their mother speak about how amazing the game is--barring the combat, of course. I borrowed a copy off a friend as I don't personally feel comfortable giving CDPR money with the Cyberpunk/transphobia situation, but ya know, I was on my way.

So before I get into this let me say a few things (so I don't have people telling me about how I didn't get the whole experience or whatever):
- I watched the TV show first and thought Yenn's writing (specifically her obsession with babies) was deeply misogynistic. Friend swore the game was not nearly as bad. (GO READ THE THREADMARK BEFORE YOU TELL ME ABOUT HOW IT'S NOT MISOGYNISTIC. YOU DON'T HAVE TO AGREE WITH ME, THAT'S TOTALLY FINE, I'M JUST DONE EXPLAINING THIS POINT :) )
- I've completed the main story line, and did a fair amount of sidequests. Got the griffin armor updated, enacted the assassination, chose a ruler of Skelliege, did all the witcher contracts, etc--I didn't do everything, but I feel like I've done more than enough to have gotten a pretty good look at the game.

Anyway, back to my point: Holy shit was I not warned how misogynistic this game is.

It's everything; the way female characters are written, the blatant sexualization of every female character, and, most of all, how often violence against them is highly sexualized. I'm gonna try to contains my thoughts on each of these below, but wow, do I have a lot to say. (Also, preface: this is not every instance I had an issue with--I just figured 1600 words was sufficient to get my point across).

Poorly Written Female Characters

So the thing I hear the most about the Witcher is how the writing is so incredibly excellent--but the whole time all I could think about was how...uninspired every woman you interact with is.

So you have two major love interests, right? Triss and Yenn--Triss is (I guess?) supposed to be sweeter compared to Yenn, who is described multiple times as "bitchy" (even by Geralt himself, even on her romance route....okay....). I suppose the two may have more personality otherwise, but I was absolutely annoyed with how the entirety of their character seemed to revolve around Geralt, and how both were written to fulfill some dude's fantasy.

Triss, like I said, is supposed to be sweeter, but is written to be head over heels into Geralt. Who left her 6 months before because he loved Yenn or something--but she's still in love with him, even up until to the end of the game (multiple characters comment on it). The only facet of Triss explored in this game other than her relationship/love of Geralt is that she's helping mages escape Novigrad! Cool! Actual character motivation outside of Geralt! Except she literally cannot do it on her own (requires the assistance of Geralt and another male character--which, I get, you want Geralt to be the hero, but like...can she have a single thing maybe?). And after it's done I don't think it's ever even really mentioned again outside of maybe one comment that everyone is safe. The rest of the game is just her looking wide eyed at Geralt and feeling sad that Yenn has his heart (if you do the Yenn path). Great.

Yenn, on the other hand, is "bitchy". She's secretive, arrogant, and sometimes cruel. Okay, I can get on board with a mean woman--but Yenn, imo, fits way too nicely into the "bitchy woman everyone hates" trope. She's willing to sacrifice literally anything else to find Ciri, including defiling Skellige's cultural artifacts and locations. And every time she does, she's met with multiple people telling her just how awful and horrible she is. You don't even really have a chance to defend her in a lot of situations. She feels like a women who was created simply for the original author to deal with his mixed feelings towards a beautiful woman who scorned him.

Then there's her dedication to Ciri and Geralt. Don't get me wrong, I get the appeal of the 'parent figure willing to do anything for their kid' or lover willing to go through hell. But making Yennefer, an incredibly powerful sorceress, have her entire plot revolve around her 'adopted daughter' and love interest sucks. At the end of the game, she gives everything up to go retire with Geralt (at least in my ending). You even have the option to say "doesn't really sound like you"--because it doesn't! It's effectively a rendition of 'babies ever after'--Yenn knows her daughter is okay and now wants to settle with her man. Her man who she uses potentially infinite power (ie: the genie sidequest) to make sure he really loves her. All of which would be sweet in a vacuum, but feels misogynistic given how else she's presented.

I think a lot of the female characters are poorly written--but that'd take a lifetime to write so I'd like to focus on one other character that almost seemed well written but still bothered me: Cerys.

Cerys is smart, reasonable, levelheaded, etc. I enjoyed putting her on the thrown of Skellige. But the more I thought about it, the more I felt Cerys falls into sexist notions of gender. Her brother, Hjalmer, gets to be impulsive and reckless and ready for combat. Cerys does not--I think this tv tropes article does a decent job of explaining why this concept often times plays into sexist frameworks. But, in essence, it's this--women aren't allowed to be flawed like men and taken seriously. They have to go above and beyond to be seen as equals.

Sexualization of Every Female Character

I feel like this one is pretty apparent, but for the sake of thoroughness, let's go through how most of the women in the cast are subjected to sexualization.

Yenn: Wearing form fitting clothing--even when she swaps to her 'flowy' skirt, it still conforms to her ass. Yikes. Plenty of camera shots to make sure you can see her ass and boobs. Yuck.
Triss: Skin tight clothing with a huge cleavage window...even though she's trying not to attract unwanted attention? They just give her a little hood when she's supposed to be 'undercover' or whatever, because it's important that you can see how hot she is at any given time.
Ciri: For some godforsaken reason, lacks a button on her shirt so you can see her bra at any given time. Also even though she's running around, doing combat maneuvers, beating up bad guys, is wearing 3 inch heeled boots. I love me a cute pair of boots but I'm pretty sure anyone would agree they're not particularly suited for combat.
Every other sorceress: Boobs are just out there (also, a lot of these outfits are just...straight up not cute and seem to be designed entirely around appealing to the male gaze, which doesn't even make sense for the characters imo).
Ves: GIRL WHY IS YOUR SHIRT OPEN? AREN'T YOU FIGHTING A GODDAMN WAR? literally having the only female soldier just have her boobs out...why?? why????

Cerys is just about the only woman I recall not being highly sexualized.

Also, on a related note, literally the only humanoid characters I saw with a darker than pasty skin tone were succubus--who were obviously sexualized. Hate to see that racist fetishization of woc. Hate to see it. And every single woman seems to have the same body type--also hate to see it.

Sexualization and Commodification of Violence against Women

Okay so this section I'm gonna throw a few trigger warnings on because honestly I wish someone had done so for me before I played the game.

CW/TW: Sexual Violence, Domestic Violence, Hanging, Cutting, Crucifixion, Disfigurement

This game heavily relies upon brutalizing women to make a point (usually when it really doesn't need to)--and almost always that brutalization is sexualized.

So. I could deal with the game until I got to the Whoreson Jr. I actually had to get up because I felt sick to my stomach when I got to this point. In case you need a refresher, Geralt's looking for Ciri at this point, and knows at some point she ran into Whoreson Jr, a local crime boss. So he manages to get into Whoreson's house to pay him a visit, get some info about Ciri.

Except when you arrive, you find a woman, either naked or basically wearing no clothes (don't remember and frankly don't want to rewatch the scene), effectively crucified outside the room. Geralt makes some comment about "he better not have done that to Ciri" and I guess the point is to illustrate Geralt is done with Whoreson's shit--really feels completely unnecessary to literally have A NAKED CRUCIFIED CORPSE on display--but whatever. Okay. I'm just gonna go into the room and move past it.

Inside, there are multiple more naked women, all lying about the room, either dead or unconscious. All have at least cuts on them, on their arms and legs, and obviously are posed as sexual objects for Whoreson's enjoyment. But the worst is that there is literally a hanged naked woman, strung from the ceiling. And she is in almost every goddamn shot in this scene, regardless of the camera angle--some element of her is always there, reminding you of her existence. At this point I actually had to go take a break; there was NO REASON to subject the player to that level of sexual violence or just..violence misogyny. The point was made 100x over--Whoreson is a bad dude. She was simply there for shock value--which, honestly, most women feel to be.

A side quest that opens up soon after that is in which you have to track down a serial killer that has forced Priscilla, Dandelion's love interest, to drink formaldehyde, brutalizing her and sending her close to death. Already, I'm annoyed--can't have this somewhat interesting woman actually get out of this unscathed, right? But it gets worse--as you progress through the quest, you chase down various leads. At some point, you come across one of your suspects actively burning a naked sex worker--with at least one or two prods actively being shown to the viewer. Once again, for no real reason other than shock value and, I guess, to show a 'hot lady' in pain. You can choose to just let him continue on his way as well, which actively disgusted me to the point where I had to take a break from playing.

Edit of additional quest: The bloody baron quest!! Sorry what--was there an attempt to make me feel bad for a guy who routinely abused his wife because she cheated on him like 20 years ago???? Like what???? How is this supposed to be 'nuanced'--even if she's not a great person, I'm still not on board with you ROUTINELY BEATING HER?

Then there's one of moments--like finding Phillipia with her eyes ripped out because Radovid has a grudge against her. Sure, maybe it makes sense in the wider context of the story--but I honestly can't recall a single male character who's forced to endure that level of lasting torture that actively leaves him scarred. Dudu is probably the closest, and he ends up with a scar over his eye.

In summation: there's just an obvious difference between the treatment of male and female characters. Women are sexualized, abused, and just poorly written. I was really disappointed with my experience with the Witcher--because as much as I liked actually running around doing monster contracts, I soon enough would be reminded that in this game world, women don't get to be anything beyond sacks of meat to be sexualized or brutalized. Maybe there are some non sexualized, well written women somewhere, but I sure didn't find them in my 75 hour playthrough.
 
Last edited:

John Kowalski

Member
Oct 27, 2017
18,662
Yeah, as much as i enjoyed this game, the writing and position of women in the story was not part of it.
 

His Majesty

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,651
Belgium
there's just an obvious difference between the treatment of male and female characters. Women are sexualized, abused, and just poorly written. I was really disappointed with my experience with the Witcher--because as much as I liked actually running around doing monster contracts, I soon enough would be reminded that in this game world, women don't get to be anything beyond sacks of meat to be sexualized or brutalized. Maybe there are some non sexualized, well written women somewhere, but I sure didn't find them in my 75 hour playthrough.
I think that's a bit of a superficial take on the situation. It's clear that there is no gender equality in the world of the witcher but the game still provides many scenario's in which women rise to the occasion and shine in their own right. There are definitely some poor scenes (I agree with the Whoreson Junior quest by the way which feels like cheap shock sexual violence where women are used as props) but overall The Witcher 3 features a wide cast of well written and intriguing female characters, all of them with their own strengths and flaws.

RPS and Kotaku have also written some good pieces on how The Witcher 3 handles female representation.

Rock Paper Shotgun - The Women of The Witcher 3
Kotaku - The Complicated Women of The Witcher 3
 

ANDS

Banned
Jun 25, 2019
566
Poorly written female characters? I might think the same thing if I jumped into the series at the last game.
 

purseowner

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,956
UK
The first game had collectable cards of women in states of undress. It's had problems with women from the word go.
 

cabelhigh

Member
Nov 2, 2017
1,105
Unfortunately, its kind of par for the course considering the books the game is based on. The books are WAY WORSE. Shockingly misogynistic, even.

And elevating above that was clearly never CDPR's priority
 

Ferrs

Avenger
Oct 26, 2017
15,165
Take a drink every time you play a sidequest in Novigrad where a female character is being harassed, tortured or killed just for shock value. Half an hour and you'll be already drunk.
 
OP
OP
aiswyda

aiswyda

Member
Aug 11, 2018
2,762
I think that's a bit of a superficial take on the situation. It's clear that there is no gender equality in the world of the witcher but the game still provides many scenario's in which women rise to the occasion and shine in their own right. There are definitely some poor scenes (I agree with the Whoreson Junior quest by the way which feels like cheap shock sexual violence where women are used as props) but overall The Witcher 3 features a wide cast of well written and intriguing female characters, all of them with their own strengths and flaws.

RPS and Kotaku have also written some good pieces on how The Witcher 3 handles female representation.

Rock Paper Shotgun - The Women of The Witcher 3
Kotaku - The Complicated Women of The Witcher 3
...both of these articles are written by men. I'm a nonbinary woman (DFAB). I dunno about you but I think that sort of colors our experiences with them.

Also I just skimmed through the Kotaku article and he seems to agree that a lot of the writing and treatment of women is bad. Even Keira, for example, who is supposed to be a strong woman in charge of her sexuality is sexualized and relatively helpless if not for Geralt giving her safety--from a quick glance online, she's killed if you don't let her go to Kaer Morn? and if you do, she rides off with Lambert, filling in sort of the seductress role. The same role she uses against Geralt.

It's boring and sexist that every single female character has to be sexy and use the fact she's sexy to her 'advantage'. It's not good writing, it's lazy.
 

Chumunga64

Member
Jun 22, 2018
5,291
thinking about it, Geralt is a huge gary stu and if he were a girl, people would complain lmao

"I was experimented on in my tragic past which made me stronger, faster, and cooler than a normal human. Nobody can accept me except for all the friends I made and I have sex with so many attractive women"
 

AgeOfZelda

Member
Oct 27, 2017
128
I'm glad I haven't done any of those latter side quests, but I have to agree how absurd it is that all the women outside Priscilla and and Cerys have exposed skin in the outfits. Like you, Ves was the one that just made me stop for a moment. As you said, she's a physical combatant! Why isn't she armored?! I know her commander calls her out on it at one point, but it doesn't help!
That said, I did like Ciri and how Yen and Geralt doted on her, though reading this does make me think about the latter again.
 
OP
OP
aiswyda

aiswyda

Member
Aug 11, 2018
2,762
Poorly written female characters? I might think the same thing if I jumped into the series at the last game.
LOL okay tell me all about all the well written female characters in the first two games. I'm sure they're rich with them. Is it Triss who also seems to only really exist for Geralt, love of her life? Or is it one of the sexy sorceresses who uses their boobs to get their way?
The first game had collectable cards of women in states of undress. It's had problems with women from the word go.
Oh absolutely--I sort of expected that sort of juvenile sexism. What I'm talking about is on another level, imo.
 

WishIwasAwolf

Banned
Oct 24, 2020
260
I am sorry but that is just a cultural thing, it's written to be like medieval Europe right?
But seriously; over there women rights have about the same value as LGBTQ+ rights. You should look at their twitter feed or other games. Or rather, don't. The game is apparently good but I don't condone piracy and I refuse to pay CDPR so I will never play it.

Based on your well written description, thanks, it appears the game was designed by incels.


LOL okay tell me all about all the well written female characters in the first two games. I'm sure they're rich with them. Is it Triss who also seems to only really exist for Geralt, love of her life? Or is it one of the sexy sorceresses who uses their boobs to get their way?

Oh absolutely--I sort of expected that sort of juvenile sexism. What I'm talking about is on another level, imo.
OMG you will be ashamed of your words and deeds! Didn't you know that at the end of the second game, an evil sorcerer casts a spell on all the women in the world, which results in their blood only being able to oxygenate through their skin? Specifically the breast-area?
A lot of them need to dress like that in order to survive, otherwise they would suffocate or something.
 

Kinthey

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
13,490
Also I just skimmed through the Kotaku article and he seems to agree that a lot of the writing and treatment of women is bad. Even Keira, for example, who is supposed to be a strong woman in charge of her sexuality is sexualized and relatively helpless if not for Geralt giving her safety--from a quick glance online, she's killed if you don't let her go to Kaer Morn? and if you do, she rides off with Lambert, filling in sort of the seductress role. The same role she uses against Geralt.
I don't remember her taking advantage of Lambert. To me it seemed more like two cynics finding a kindred spirit
 
OP
OP
aiswyda

aiswyda

Member
Aug 11, 2018
2,762
I'm glad I haven't done any of those latter side quests, but I have to agree how absurd it is that all the women outside Priscilla and and Cerys have exposed skin in the outfits. Like you, Ves was the one that just made me stop for a moment. As you said, she's a physical combatant! Why isn't she armored?! I know her commander calls her out on it at one point, but it doesn't help!
That said, I did like Ciri and how Yen and Geralt doted on her, though reading this does make me think about the latter again.
Yep!! I was so excited for Priscilla, actually clothed and sort of fun, that when she's turned into a victim who Dandelion gets to nurse back to health for the whole game, I was so bummed...it made me so afraid something would also happen to Cerys.

I do enjoy Geralt and Yenn's love of Ciri--I just don't think it should be examined in a vacuum. The relationships sadly feel very tied to the sexist overview of the game.

I am sorry but that is just a cultural thing, it's written to be like medieval Europe right?
But seriously; over there women rights have about the same value as LGBTQ+ rights. You should look at their twitter feed or other games. Or rather, don't. The game is apparently good but I don't condone piracy and I refuse to pay CDPR so I will never play it.

Based on your well written description, thanks, it appears the game was designed by incels.
I think that's not correct, and even if it was, simplifies this conversation. A lot of people have played this game and it makes me worried I never hear anyone talking about any of this :(
I don't remember her taking advantage of Lambert. To me it seemed more like two cynics finding a kindred spirit
I suppose it could be, but there's no real explanation given (from what I recall anyway) and the entire way Keira was written made her seem more as a seductress. Perhaps she did find love--but nothing in my interactions with her character would make me think as much. Could be wrong.
 
Nov 11, 2017
884
Poorly written female characters? I might think the same thing if I jumped into the series at the last game.
I wouldn't even go there, representation of women in W3 looks positively progressive in comparison to the first two. Anyone remember the 'collect the nudie cards by sleeping with all the women' aspect of W1? Pepperidge Farm remembers
 

Ales34

Member
Apr 15, 2018
2,775
Yeah, it's quite disgusting in hindsight. I wasn't really paying attention to it when I was playing the game for the first time, because I enjoyed the game, but thinking back, yeah, the amount of boobs in the game is very juvenile and unnecessary.
 

IIFloodyII

Member
Oct 26, 2017
16,540
Yeah, it's pretty bad, one you didn't mention that I absolutely hate how they just sideline is Priscilla, she just gets thrown away and never seen again once she's not needed. Even just seeing her recover would have went a long way, but they just didn't seem to care at all once she'd fulfilled her role in helping you save Dandelion. The only reason you even know if she does fully recover, is from very missable optional dialog in Blood & Wine.
 

Bit_Reactor

Banned
Apr 9, 2019
4,413
Yenn, on the other hand, is "bitchy". She's secretive, arrogant, and sometimes cruel. Okay, I can get on board with a mean woman--but Yenn, imo, fits way too nicely into the "bitchy woman everyone hates" trope. She's willing to sacrifice literally anything else to find Ciri, including defiling Skellige's cultural artifacts and locations. And every time she does, she's met with multiple people telling her just how awful and horrible she is. You don't even really have a chance to defend her in a lot of situations. She feels like a women who was created simply for the original author to deal with his mixed feelings towards a beautiful woman who scorned him.

Then there's her dedication to Ciri and Geralt. Don't get me wrong, I get the appeal of the 'parent figure willing to do anything for their kid' or lover willing to go through hell. But making Yennefer, an incredibly powerful sorceress, have her entire plot revolve around her 'adopted daughter' and love interest sucks. At the end of the game, she gives everything up to go retire with Geralt (at least in my ending). You even have the option to say "doesn't really sound like you"--because it doesn't! It's effectively a rendition of 'babies ever after'--Yenn knows her daughter is okay and now wants to settle with her man. Her man who she uses potentially infinite power (ie: the genie sidequest) to make sure he really loves her. All of which would be sweet in a vacuum, but feels misogynistic given how else she's presented.
I won't go through each of your points because there are varying truths to them all but I feel this puts the onus on the writer to unconfirm your own thoughts about the scenes rather than the writing as it's written.

Yenn is a powerful sorceress. Yes.
Yenn defiles artifacts and says fuck the traditions. Yes.
Yenn also sexually desires Geralt to some degree. Yes.
Yenn also wants to know if she's bound by a wish of a Djinn. Yes.

Yenn sacrifices whatever she wants to, including necromancy, to find the wherabouts of a child she's been fated to be linked to, which is drawn to her own plotline of not bearing kids, just like a Witcher.

You don't have a chance to defend her because THEN if you did, the same people complaining about this would be complaining that Geralt has to constantly defend her to the men in the story (classic lose/lose situation).

The fact that you draw a conclusion about a woman created "because the author was scorned" is your own internal bias at play and there's not a thing the writer or anyone on this forum can do to change that perspective.

Her dedication to Ciri mirror's Geralt's because their stories are in many ways meant to mirror each other. Sorceresses and Witchers are supposed to be similar for a lot of reasons.

To speak to the later point about knowing if "Geralt really loves her" that's just as much wanting to break her own possible second guessing of the relationships. Yenn believes she MIGHT be under teh wish of a Djinn that Geralt forced upon her and wants to know if her feelings (and his) are real or not, or if they've just been under a spell. This seems the opposite of misogynistic (to me) because it's her wanting to make sure that her decisions are her own, and that a spell of any kind is not defining them.

The Djinn followup is to make sure that nothing in the books is binding her to him anymore, as she suspects it might be. The "happy ending" of both Yenn and Triss I can't speak to because the entire scenario is played out to "pick your love interest" and if they DIDN'T end up together in the end it'd not fulfill that promise. That's not to say it's inherently right that picking your love interest has to end with "Settling down" per se, but there is context to all of these actions.

I won't say every execution of a female character is spotless, but there's a reason people like these characters and it's beyond a surface level reading of them.
 
OP
OP
aiswyda

aiswyda

Member
Aug 11, 2018
2,762
Yeah, it's pretty bad, one you didn't mention that I absolutely hate how they just sideline is Priscilla, she just gets thrown away and never seen again once she's not needed. Even just seeing her recover would have went a long way, but they just didn't seem to care at all once she'd fulfilled her role in helping you save Dandelion. The only reason you even know if she does fully recover, is from very missable optional dialog in Blood & Wine.
Oh my god I was looking for her before I got to the final mission and gave up, figured she was somewhere else!! But no!! She's just gone!! The one woman I actually thought was fun, just absolutely gone from existence...

The fact that you draw a conclusion about a woman created "because the author was scorned" is your own internal bias at play and there's not a thing the writer or anyone on this forum can do to change that perspective.
You're right in that this is my reading of the situation: as a nonbinary woman who's been subjected to many a nerdy man's feelings and frustrations towards women, that's how I feel. I've been treated in ways very similar to the way Yenn is treated by the residents of Skellige due to those frustrations, and it's hard for me to see that as anything other than a manifestation of that.

No one has to feel the same way as me, and people are free to enjoy Yenn (there are parts of her I did like!). But having her be the effective scapegoat for all of Skellige in order to move Geralt's story is not excused by the fact it's a means to an end. They could have written another scenario into which Yenn wasn't screamed at and hated by everyone in the isles--they chose to write that plot point and that choice can be called out as feeling misogynistic.
 

ciddative

Member
Apr 5, 2018
1,552
The Bloody Baron quest line does give you a few opportunities to show empathy for a clearly vile man who has committed horrific acts and who has suffered mostly as a result of his own decisions. I don’t see this as a failing or misstep.


Ves’ shirt...

As someone In new game plus at Level 70 after 200+ hours played, this remains the most egregious and indefensible thing In the whole game. I just can’t with that, it’s ludicrous and gross, and a disservice to a character I remember liking in Witcher 2
 

Bit_Reactor

Banned
Apr 9, 2019
4,413
User Banned (Permanent): Mansplaining and dismissiveness towards concerns of misogyny in media; previous severe infraction for rationalizing transphobia and harassment over a series of posts
You're right in that this is my reading of the situation: as a nonbinary woman who's been subjected to many a nerdy man's feelings and frustrations towards women, that's how I feel. I've been treated in ways very similar to the way Yenn is treated by the residents of Skellige due to those frustrations, and it's hard for me to see that as anything other than a manifestation of that.

No one has to feel the same way as me, and people are free to enjoy Yenn (there are parts of her I did like!). But having her be the effective scapegoat for all of Skellige in order to move Geralt's story is not excused by the fact it's a means to an end. They could have written another scenario into which Yenn wasn't screamed at and hated by everyone in the isles--they chose to write that plot point and that choice can be called out as feeling misogynistic.
Your identifiers are only relevant in the sense that it defines where your perspective comes from. That does not make it truth. It makes it your read. The minute you identify "misogyny" you are therefore creating a claim on a perspective of a story you are attempting to prove. Your read of the story is clearly painted in a specific lens.

The issue comes when your experience flavors the text. I don't believe that's the writer's responsibility to compensate for or cater to. "I've dealt with X" doesn't make Y the same thing.

The minute you say "This is misogynist" means you're explicitly explaining "You DO have to feel the same way as me" or they have to remain quiet. Because to defend against it is a much more uphill battle than saying "I'm X and I believe Y therefore if you enjoy it, I'm going to point out why I think it's wrong."

Her being the "Scapegoat for all of Skellige" is an interesting take that I didn't read myself, and didn't read any more into than any other plot line in the game. They wrote the story the way they did for reasons we cannot confirm, but to say it's misogynistic without much basis other than personal experience and go "hey man that's just how I read it" I feel is already disingenuous.

Yenn from book 1 is someone that does not play by the rules. Sorceresses feel above that. Up until the "purge" of sorceresses and the like she's technically right. They were on top of the world and they own the place. If suddenly she started playing by the rules and being Demure and polite, I'd argue that would be far worse for Yen's character than having her continue the same character she's always had.

If anything I loved the fact that Geralt is in a lot of ways very submissive to Yen compared to dominant with Triss depending on the scenario. Yen almost treats him like a dog at times, leaving out crucial details of plans, "dealing with his presence" rather than desiring it, and only really speaking beneficially of him when its his skills as a Witcher usually, and the "Geralt we're at a funeral" line when Geralt (the player) attempts to flirt kind of helps reinforce that reading of the charater imo.

That being said, there may be issues with the execution, I just fundamentally disagree with a viewer putting the onus on the writer to paint it against their own perception of it. Like with most debates it means that no one can really create a valid discussion around it because your reading is already done. And those that challenge it and/or disagree can be called then sexist or something else by disagreeing with it, which, to me, poisons the well.

I understand your perspective, I just disagree with flatly defining something as X instead of framing it as "My experiences with this topic make me feel like it's X" Because one insinuates something is definitively problematic while another states the belief it's problematic and provides the writer's perspective (yours) to provide proper context for why the feeling is such.

When someone says:

It's everything; the way female characters are written, the blatant sexualization of every female character, and, most of all, how often violence against them is highly sexualized.
That perspective is not going "Well this is my read" this very forwardly states that even disagreeing with it could be grounds for painting the person disagreeing with in an instantly negative light, which I'm sure I have been just for disagreeing with and/or engaging with the subject here.
 
OP
OP
aiswyda

aiswyda

Member
Aug 11, 2018
2,762
Your identifiers are only relevant in the sense that it defines where your perspective comes from. That does not make it truth. It makes it your read. The minute you identify "misogyny" you are therefore creating a claim on a perspective of a story you are attempting to prove. Your read of the story is clearly painted in a specific lens.

The issue comes when your experience flavors the text. I don't believe that's the writer's responsibility to compensate for or cater to. "I've dealt with X" doesn't make Y the same thing.

The minute you say "This is misogynist" means you're explicitly explaining "You DO have to feel the same way as me" or they have to remain quiet. Because to defend against it is a much more uphill battle than saying "I'm X and I believe Y therefore if you enjoy it, I'm going to point out why I think it's wrong."

Her being the "Scapegoat for all of Skellige" is an interesting take that I didn't read myself, and didn't read any more into than any other plot line in the game. They wrote the story the way they did for reasons we cannot confirm, but to say it's misogynistic without much basis other than personal experience and go "hey man that's just how I read it" I feel is already disingenuous.

Yenn from book 1 is someone that does not play by the rules. Sorceresses feel above that. Up until the "purge" of sorceresses and the like she's technically right. They were on top of the world and they own the place. If suddenly she started playing by the rules and being Demure and polite, I'd argue that would be far worse for Yen's character than having her continue the same character she's always had.

If anything I loved the fact that Geralt is in a lot of ways very submissive to Yen compared to dominant with Triss depending on the scenario. Yen almost treats him like a dog at times, leaving out crucial details of plans, "dealing with his presence" rather than desiring it, and only really speaking beneficially of him when its his skills as a Witcher usually, and the "Geralt we're at a funeral" line when Geralt (the player) attempts to flirt kind of helps reinforce that reading of the charater imo.

That being said, there may be issues with the execution, I just fundamentally disagree with a viewer putting the onus on the writer to paint it against their own perception of it. Like with most debates it means that no one can really create a valid discussion around it because your reading is already done. And those that challenge it and/or disagree can be called then sexist or something else by disagreeing with it, which, to me, poisons the well.

I understand your perspective, I just disagree with flatly defining something as X instead of framing it as "My experiences with this topic make me feel like it's X" Because one insinuates something is definitively problematic while another states the belief it's problematic and provides the writer's perspective (yours) to provide proper context for why the feeling is such.

When someone says:



That perspective is not going "Well this is my read" this very forwardly states that even disagreeing with it could be grounds for painting the person disagreeing with in an instantly negative light, which I'm sure I have been just for disagreeing with and/or engaging with the subject here.
Lmao I did not see you in a negative light until you wrote out a fairly condescending post !! Enjoy your take I have no desire to engage with you any further :)
 

BossAttack

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
28,941
I find some truth in your points, but I disagree a whole lot with much of what you said about Yennifer and Cerys. But, that would take a while to type out, so I might return to type it out later. Of course, my opinion is likely colored by being a man so, take that as you will.
 

Lady Gaia

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,708
Seattle
I found the world of The Witcher 3 exhaustingly oppressive. In the current political climate I think I'd struggle even more to enjoy it, and I see every indication that CDPR doubled down on their socially regressive representation in CP2077. I appreciated the technology and art of TW3 and think it's generally well written, it's just one that it is much more empowering and enjoyable for some of their customers than others.
 

Beth Cyra

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,758
I played and hated TW3 and yeah it’s treatment of women wasn’t at all to my liking.

That said on your point of no one warning you...this is a fandom that takes active joy in tearing Triss down and calling her all kinds of names while also defending shit like CDPR treatment of TransWomen.

These games are just male power fantasy and it’s all they have ever been.
 

Hasi

Banned
Apr 25, 2020
283
Fully agree with you, I tried playing it a couple months back and I put it down for these reasons a lot earlier, sad to hear it only gets worse from there.
 

PK Gaming

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,937
Lmao I did not see you in a negative light until you wrote out a fairly condescending post !! Enjoy your take I have no desire to engage with you any further :)
What exactly is condescending about his post? His argument is predicated on "I understand your perspective, but ultimately disagree with your read and here's why."

Which fair, since it's a game forum, and differences in opinion and all that. But I feel like calling someone out for being condescending and responding with "have fun with your take, I have no desire to engage with you any further :)" is hypocritical.
 

HBK

Member
Oct 30, 2017
4,552
So I decided to finally try out the Witcher 3 after hearing pretty much everyone and their mother speak about how amazing the game is--barring the combat, of course. I borrowed a copy off a friend as I don't personally feel comfortable giving CDPR money with the Cyberpunk/transphobia situation, but ya know, I was on my way.

So before I get into this let me say a few things (so I don't have people telling me about how I didn't get the whole experience or whatever):
- I watched the TV show first and thought Yenn's writing (specifically her obsession with babies) was deeply misogynistic. Friend swore the game was not nearly as bad.
- I've completed the main story line, and did a fair amount of sidequests. Got the griffin armor updated, enacted the assassination, chose a ruler of Skelliege, did all the witcher contracts, etc--I didn't do everything, but I feel like I've done more than enough to have gotten a pretty good look at the game.

Anyway, back to my point: Holy shit was I not warned how misogynistic this game is.

It's everything; the way female characters are written, the blatant sexualization of every female character, and, most of all, how often violence against them is highly sexualized. I'm gonna try to contains my thoughts on each of these below, but wow, do I have a lot to say. (Also, preface: this is not every instance I had an issue with--I just figured 1600 words was sufficient to get my point across).

Poorly Written Female Characters

So the thing I hear the most about the Witcher is how the writing is so incredibly excellent--but the whole time all I could think about was how...uninspired every woman you interact with is.

So you have two major love interests, right? Triss and Yenn--Triss is (I guess?) supposed to be sweeter compared to Yenn, who is described multiple times as "bitchy" (even by Geralt himself, even on her romance route....okay....). I suppose the two may have more personality otherwise, but I was absolutely annoyed with how the entirety of their character seemed to revolve around Geralt, and how both were written to fulfill some dude's fantasy.

Triss, like I said, is supposed to be sweeter, but is written to be head over heels into Geralt. Who left her 6 months before because he loved Yenn or something--but she's still in love with him, even up until to the end of the game (multiple characters comment on it). The only facet of Triss explored in this game other than her relationship/love of Geralt is that she's helping mages escape Novigrad! Cool! Actual character motivation outside of Geralt! Except she literally cannot do it on her own (requires the assistance of Geralt and another male character--which, I get, you want Geralt to be the hero, but like...can she have a single thing maybe?). And after it's done I don't think it's ever even really mentioned again outside of maybe one comment that everyone is safe. The rest of the game is just her looking wide eyed at Geralt and feeling sad that Yenn has his heart (if you do the Yenn path). Great.

Yenn, on the other hand, is "bitchy". She's secretive, arrogant, and sometimes cruel. Okay, I can get on board with a mean woman--but Yenn, imo, fits way too nicely into the "bitchy woman everyone hates" trope. She's willing to sacrifice literally anything else to find Ciri, including defiling Skellige's cultural artifacts and locations. And every time she does, she's met with multiple people telling her just how awful and horrible she is. You don't even really have a chance to defend her in a lot of situations. She feels like a women who was created simply for the original author to deal with his mixed feelings towards a beautiful woman who scorned him.

Then there's her dedication to Ciri and Geralt. Don't get me wrong, I get the appeal of the 'parent figure willing to do anything for their kid' or lover willing to go through hell. But making Yennefer, an incredibly powerful sorceress, have her entire plot revolve around her 'adopted daughter' and love interest sucks. At the end of the game, she gives everything up to go retire with Geralt (at least in my ending). You even have the option to say "doesn't really sound like you"--because it doesn't! It's effectively a rendition of 'babies ever after'--Yenn knows her daughter is okay and now wants to settle with her man. Her man who she uses potentially infinite power (ie: the genie sidequest) to make sure he really loves her. All of which would be sweet in a vacuum, but feels misogynistic given how else she's presented.

I think a lot of the female characters are poorly written--but that'd take a lifetime to write so I'd like to focus on one other character that almost seemed well written but still bothered me: Cerys.

Cerys is smart, reasonable, levelheaded, etc. I enjoyed putting her on the thrown of Skellige. But the more I thought about it, the more I felt Cerys falls into sexist notions of gender. Her brother, Hjalmer, gets to be impulsive and reckless and ready for combat. Cerys does not--I think this tv tropes article does a decent job of explaining why this concept often times plays into sexist frameworks. But, in essence, it's this--women aren't allowed to be flawed like men and taken seriously. They have to go above and beyond to be seen as equals.

Sexualization of Every Female Character

I feel like this one is pretty apparent, but for the sake of thoroughness, let's go through how most of the women in the cast are subjected to sexualization.

Yenn: Literally wearing skin tight clothing--even when she swaps to her 'flowy' skirt, it still conforms to her ass. Yikes.
Triss: Skin tight clothing with a huge cleavage window...even though she's trying not to attract unwanted attention? They just give her a little hood when she's supposed to be 'undercover' or whatever, because it's important that you can see how hot she is at any given time.
Ciri: For some godforsaken reason, lacks a button on her shirt so you can see her bra at any given time. Also even though she's running around, doing combat maneuvers, beating up bad guys, is wearing 3 inch heeled boots. I love me a cute pair of boots but I'm pretty sure anyone would agree they're not particularly suited for combat.
Every other sorceress: Boobs are just out there (also, a lot of these outfits are just...straight up not cute and seem to be designed entirely around appealing to the male gaze, which doesn't even make sense for the characters imo).
Ves: GIRL WHY IS YOUR SHIRT OPEN? AREN'T YOU FIGHTING A GODDAMN WAR? literally having the only female soldier just have her boobs out...why?? why????

Cerys is just about the only woman I recall not being highly sexualized.

Also, on a related note, literally the only humanoid characters I saw with a darker than pasty skin tone were succubus--who were obviously sexualized. Hate to see that racist fetishization of woc. Hate to see it. And every single woman seems to have the same body type--also hate to see it.

Sexualization and Commodification of Violence against Women

Okay so this section I'm gonna throw a few trigger warnings on because honestly I wish someone had done so for me before I played the game.

CW/TW: Sexual Violence, Domestic Violence, Hanging, Cutting, Crucifixion, Disfigurement

This game heavily relies upon brutalizing women to make a point (usually when it really doesn't need to)--and almost always that brutalization is sexualized.

So. I could deal with the game until I got to the Whoreson Jr. I actually had to get up because I felt sick to my stomach when I got to this point. In case you need a refresher, Geralt's looking for Ciri at this point, and knows at some point she ran into Whoreson Jr, a local crime boss. So he manages to get into Whoreson's house to pay him a visit, get some info about Ciri.

Except when you arrive, you find a woman, either naked or basically wearing no clothes (don't remember and frankly don't want to rewatch the scene), effectively crucified outside the room. Geralt makes some comment about "he better not have done that to Ciri" and I guess the point is to illustrate Geralt is done with Whoreson's shit--really feels completely unnecessary to literally have A NAKED CRUCIFIED CORPSE on display--but whatever. Okay. I'm just gonna go into the room and move past it.

Inside, there are multiple more naked women, all lying about the room, either dead or unconscious. All have at least cuts on them, on their arms and legs, and obviously are posed as sexual objects for Whoreson's enjoyment. But the worst is that there is literally a hanged naked woman, strung from the ceiling. And she is in almost every goddamn shot in this scene, regardless of the camera angle--some element of her is always there, reminding you of her existence. At this point I actually had to go take a break; there was NO REASON to subject the player to that level of sexual violence or just..violence misogyny. The point was made 100x over--Whoreson is a bad dude. She was simply there for shock value--which, honestly, most women feel to be.

A side quest that opens up soon after that is in which you have to track down a serial killer that has forced Priscilla, Dandelion's love interest, to drink formaldehyde, brutalizing her and sending her close to death. Already, I'm annoyed--can't have this somewhat interesting woman actually get out of this unscathed, right? But it gets worse--as you progress through the quest, you chase down various leads. At some point, you come across one of your suspects actively burning a naked sex worker--with at least one or two prods actively being shown to the viewer. Once again, for no real reason other than shock value and, I guess, to show a 'hot lady' in pain. You can choose to just let him continue on his way as well, which actively disgusted me to the point where I had to take a break from playing.

Edit of additional quest: The bloody baron quest!! Sorry what--was there an attempt to make me feel bad for a guy who routinely abused his wife because she cheated on him like 20 years ago???? Like what???? How is this supposed to be 'nuanced'--even if she's not a great person, I'm still not on board with you ROUTINELY BEATING HER?

Then there's one of moments--like finding Phillipia with her eyes ripped out because Radovid has a grudge against her. Sure, maybe it makes sense in the wider context of the story--but I honestly can't recall a single male character who's forced to endure that level of lasting torture that actively leaves him scarred. Dudu is probably the closest, and he ends up with a scar over his eye.

In summation: there's just an obvious difference between the treatment of male and female characters. Women are sexualized, abused, and just poorly written. I was really disappointed with my experience with the Witcher--because as much as I liked actually running around doing monster contracts, I soon enough would be reminded that in this game world, women don't get to be anything beyond sacks of meat to be sexualized or brutalized. Maybe there are some non sexualized, well written women somewhere, but I sure didn't find them in my 75 hour playthrough.
Unfortunately it doesn’t stop at women representation. The whole political subtext Witcher 3 is pretty ... let’s just say it’s no surprise it appealed to many "gamers" lol

Brace yourself for their next game, I very much doubt it’ll get better.

(and based on recent statements, let’s just say that’s, well, pretty reasonable doubt)
 

Anton Sugar

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,113
Can't remember the character's name, but the treatment of the cross dresser was pretty gross, too. It's also completely out of character for Geralt, a dude who empathizes with literal monsters, to be weirded out by him.

Ves’ shirt...

As someone In new game plus at Level 70 after 200+ hours played, this remains the most egregious and indefensible thing In the whole game. I just can’t with that, it’s ludicrous and gross, and a disservice to a character I remember liking in Witcher 2
Didn't Ves wear a very similar outfit in Witcher 2? It was ridiculous then, too.
 
Oct 25, 2017
4,104
Lmao I did not see you in a negative light until you wrote out a fairly condescending post !! Enjoy your take I have no desire to engage with you any further :)
Except the poster is not being condescending in the least and is in fact acquiescing to a fair bit of your perspective on the matter. Whilst its obvious the opinions expressed aren't going to be altered one way or the other, its terribly poor form to shut down so flatly someone willing to discuss so delicate a topic with that level of respect.
 

SonofDonCD

Member
Oct 26, 2017
233
No one has to feel the same way as me, and people are free to enjoy Yenn (there are parts of her I did like!). But having her be the effective scapegoat for all of Skellige in order to move Geralt's story is not excused by the fact it's a means to an end. They could have written another scenario into which Yenn wasn't screamed at and hated by everyone in the isles--they chose to write that plot point and that choice can be called out as feeling misogynistic.
I did enjoy the game when it came out. But you aren't wrong about your overall point; I enjoyed the game in spite of the way women were written, not because of it (though I did enjoy Yenn overall). It does get to the point that most of the women are only used to show how bad some of the villains are, and that is such a tired trope.

I will say, though, that you are missing some context for the main three women in the game: Triss, Yennifer and Ciri. I will not say that knowing this context will change your overall feelings, but I do think some of your conclusions (mostly about the plot) would be different, like Yenn's relationship with Ciri (there is a big history there that this game doesn't go into detail nearly enough).
 

kayos90

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,065
Lmao I did not see you in a negative light until you wrote out a fairly condescending post !! Enjoy your take I have no desire to engage with you any further :)
The only poster in the thread who is willing to engage with you in a lengthy and thoughtful manner that is also civil and respectful, yet you right that individual off. This tells us exactly what kind of person you are and what kind of conversation you're willing to create and engage in. This response is in really poor taste.
 

napata

Member
Nov 2, 2017
1,677
Lmao I did not see you in a negative light until you wrote out a fairly condescending post !! Enjoy your take I have no desire to engage with you any further :)
Way to shut down any form of discussion. Might as well close the thread if this is the way it's going to go. Nothing condescending about the post you're quoting btw. I guess it's like they said "perspective".
 
OP
OP
aiswyda

aiswyda

Member
Aug 11, 2018
2,762
What exactly is condescending about his post? His argument is predicated on "I understand your perspective, but ultimately disagree with your read and here's why."

Which fair, since it's a game forum, and differences in opinion and all that. But I feel like calling someone out for being condescending and responding with "have fun with your take, I have no desire to engage with you any further :)" is also pretty condescending
The part where I agree my take on the game was colored by my experiences as a non-binary woman who has been treated as a dfab woman for most of their life, and then they spent multiple paragraphs insisting that wasn’t an argument. I wasn’t trying to present it as such. I was agreeing that my experiences colored my perception of the game—it did not mean I needed to be subjected to a lecture on how that set up a difficult task for them.

My second point was that just because something is done for the sake of the plot structure doesn’t mean it’s not misogynistic. Or, as I said “doesn’t mean it doesn’t FEEL misogynistic”. Y’all are entitled to have your own opinions, I just would disagree.

You can also find that condescending, If you like? I don’t really mind feel free to put me on ignore if you find it so terrible lol

Except the poster is not being condescending in the least and is in fact acquiescing to a fair bit of your perspective on the matter. Whilst its obvious the opinions expressed aren't going to be altered one way or the other, its terribly poor form to shut down so flatly someone willing to discuss so delicate a topic with that level of respect.
I’m on mobile so hard to reformat but see above.
 

SofNascimento

cursed
Member
Oct 28, 2017
13,121
São Paulo - Brazil
Great OP, OP. I think in some parts you might be being too hard on TW3, but maybe I'm being too soft.

One interesting aspect of TW3 is that there are no ugly women. There are old women, but if they are young, you can bet she looks great and has an amazing body (and more often than not revealing clothes). If you compare it with the men, the difference is very noticiable. You often find men missing teeth, scared either because or violence of disease or just simply not good looking.
 
Last edited:

Wednesbury

Member
Apr 10, 2018
73
- I watched the TV show first and thought Yenn's writing (specifically her obsession with babies) was deeply misogynistic.
I think you've misread her, she's not obsessed with babies, she's obsessed with power and choice. Her initial drive to regain her fertility is simply to get back the choice that was "taken" from her. She was told that to gain power she needed to give up the ability to be a mother. She's calling bullshit on that, she wants power and choice. She wants everything. Not sure how that's misogynistic.
 

His Majesty

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,651
Belgium
...both of these articles are written by men. I'm a nonbinary woman (DFAB). I dunno about you but I think that sort of colors our experiences with them.

Also I just skimmed through the Kotaku article and he seems to agree that a lot of the writing and treatment of women is bad. Even Keira, for example, who is supposed to be a strong woman in charge of her sexuality is sexualized and relatively helpless if not for Geralt giving her safety--from a quick glance online, she's killed if you don't let her go to Kaer Morn? and if you do, she rides off with Lambert, filling in sort of the seductress role. The same role she uses against Geralt.

It's boring and sexist that every single female character has to be sexy and use the fact she's sexy to her 'advantage'. It's not good writing, it's lazy.
There are for sure issues with female representation in the game. There are cases where women are used for cheap shock value and I also agree that some of the clothing on characters (e.g. Ves, Tilly) feels very inappropriate. But overall I didn't find the representation of female characters to be as one dimensional as you portray. All characters have their own strengths and flaws and aren't just used as props to support someone else's story.

Yennefer is so much more than simply a cold-hearted 'bitchy' character. Despite her obvious displeasure with the love triangle situation, she still rises above the situation and manages to work amicably with Triss for the greater good. And I love her dynamic with Geralt resembling an old married couple, where she comes off as both dominating yet also gentle. She is competent, highly determined and loyal. That also makes her dangerous to people standing in the way of her goals, making her impulsive and reckless. For me Yennefer was the character that grew on me the most in the game. On the other hand of the spectrum you have indeed Cerys, who is much more level headed and cunning, both virtues and flaws for a queen as implied in the ending as Skellige loses its fangs with her on the throne. What you wrote about women not being taken seriously is definitely a theme that is present in the game, although I would argue it is part of the sexist society that is portrayed in the world and not really a matter of poor writing. The game itself even calls it out during the Master Armorer quest. Or when you as the player (patronizingly) assume Triss cannot handle the Witch Hunters on her own.

While some characters could surely lose some cleavage (or some more body variety!), I don't think that all female characters mostly rely on their sexuality. Anna, Anna-Henrietta, Shani, Priscilla, Cerys, Philippa, Iris, ... are all intriguing female characters in their own right. Keira is (highly) sexualized because she uses it as a tool to her advantage, that's fairly obvious from her interactions with Geralt. But I don't really see this seductress angle with Lambert. In the case of Lambert it simply seems to be a matter of two cynical people taking a genuine liking to each other after helping each other out in combat. This is an excerpt from your journal on the matter.

During this battle, he came within a hair's breadth of losing his life. Luckily, Keira arrived in the nick of time and together they held back his attackers.It just might be that Lambert and Keira's later (and somewhat unexpected) relationship came about as a result of that moment, when they fought for survival at each other's side. It is also possible it was a simple matter of two attractive people taking a liking to each other. At any rate, only time could tell what would become of the couple.
So yes, I agree with you that male and female characters are treated very differently in the world. At the same time this allows characters like Yennefer, Ciri or Cerys to shine in this society while simultaneously calling out these same patriarchal assumptions and systems. It's a different approach from e.g. the world of Dragon Age where complete equality reigns but in my view it is an equally valid approach nonetheless. I can see how it can be off putting and exhausting for a woman to experience though.
 
OP
OP
aiswyda

aiswyda

Member
Aug 11, 2018
2,762
Can't remember the character's name, but the treatment of the cross dresser was pretty gross, too. It's also completely out of character for Geralt, a dude who empathizes with literal monsters, to be weirded out by him.


Didn't Ves wear a very similar outfit in Witcher 2? It was ridiculous then, too.
Yes, that was another portion of the game that stressed me out significantly! It wasn’t nearly as bad as I worried it might go given CDPR’s recent takes on trans individuals, but it wasn’t great :(
I did enjoy the game when it came out. But you aren't wrong about your overall point; I enjoyed the game in spite of the way women were written, not because of it (though I did enjoy Yenn overall). It does get to the point that most of the women are only used to show how bad some of the villains are, and that is such a tired trope.

I will say, though, that you are missing some context for the main three women in the game: Triss, Yennifer and Ciri. I will not say that knowing this context will change your overall feelings, but I do think some of your conclusions (mostly about the plot) would be different, like Yenn's relationship with Ciri (there is a big history there that this game doesn't go into detail nearly enough).
Oh for sure—this is why I specified I hadn’t interacted with the characters much outside of the TV show and third game. Within the context of that, I felt their writing wasn’t good—it could def be better on the whole.
 

Morrigan

Elden Lord
Moderator
Oct 24, 2017
22,953
What exactly is condescending about his post? His argument is predicated on "I understand your perspective, but ultimately disagree with your read and here's why."

Which fair, since it's a game forum, and differences in opinion and all that. But I feel like calling someone out for being condescending and responding with "have fun with your take, I have no desire to engage with you any further :)" is hypocritical.
Except the poster is not being condescending in the least and is in fact acquiescing to a fair bit of your perspective on the matter. Whilst its obvious the opinions expressed aren't going to be altered one way or the other, its terribly poor form to shut down so flatly someone willing to discuss so delicate a topic with that level of respect.
The only poster in the thread who is willing to engage with you in a lengthy and thoughtful manner that is also civil and respectful, yet you right that individual off. This tells us exactly what kind of person you are and what kind of conversation you're willing to create and engage in. This response is in really poor taste.
Way to shut down any form of discussion. Might as well close the thread if this is the way it's going to go. Nothing condescending about the post you're quoting btw. I guess it's like they said "perspective".
Love, LOVE to see no less than four male posters jumping in to dogpile a non-binary woman for (checks notes) brushing off a dude who was blatantly, condescendingly mansplaining to them.

What should we call this? Incepsplaining? Mansplainception? 😂
 

PK Gaming

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,937
The part where I agree my take on the game was colored by my experiences as a non-binary woman who has been treated as a dfab woman for most of their life, and then they spent multiple paragraphs insisting that wasn’t an argument. I wasn’t trying to present it as such. I was agreeing that my experiences colored my perception of the game—it did not mean I needed to be subjected to a lecture on how that set up a difficult task for them.
But this is a thread with "Witcher 3 misogyny" literally in the title. It's a recounting of your experiences with the game, which is valid, but you uses those experiences to service the greater point that Witcher 3 is misogynist (a claim I don't even necessarily disagree with). It shouldn't be an issue is someone disagrees with your conclusions, unless this thread was explicitly meant to recount your experiences in the game but the thread title makes it feel like you want to start a discussion about the games failings.

My second point was that just because something is done for the sake of the plot structure doesn’t mean it’s not misogynistic. Or, as I said “doesn’t mean it doesn’t FEEL misogynistic”. Y’all are entitled to have your own opinions, I just would disagree.
Fair.

Love, LOVE to see no less than four male posters jumping in to dogpile a non-binary woman for (checks notes) brushing off a dude who was blatantly, condescendingly mansplaining to them.

What should we call this? Incepsplaining? Mansplainception? 😂
Hey Morrigan. Long time no talk
 

Tommcatt

Member
Apr 26, 2019
2,381
What exactly is condescending about his post? His argument is predicated on "I understand your perspective, but ultimately disagree with your read and here's why."

Which fair, since it's a game forum, and differences in opinion and all that. But I feel like calling someone out for being condescending and responding with "have fun with your take, I have no desire to engage with you any further :)" is hypocritical.
Except the poster is not being condescending in the least and is in fact acquiescing to a fair bit of your perspective on the matter. Whilst its obvious the opinions expressed aren't going to be altered one way or the other, its terribly poor form to shut down so flatly someone willing to discuss so delicate a topic with that level of respect.
The only poster in the thread who is willing to engage with you in a lengthy and thoughtful manner that is also civil and respectful, yet you right that individual off. This tells us exactly what kind of person you are and what kind of conversation you're willing to create and engage in. This response is in really poor taste.
"Your identifiers are only relevant in the sense that it defines where your perspective comes from. That does not make it truth. It makes it your read. The minute you identify "misogyny" you are therefore creating a claim on a perspective of a story you are attempting to prove. Your read of the story is clearly painted in a specific lens.

The issue comes when your experience flavors the text. I don't believe that's the writer's responsibility to compensate for or cater to. "I've dealt with X" doesn't make Y the same thing.

The minute you say "This is misogynist" means you're explicitly explaining "You DO have to feel the same way as me" or they have to remain quiet. Because to defend against it is a much more uphill battle than saying "I'm X and I believe Y therefore if you enjoy it, I'm going to point out why I think it's wrong."

Her being the "Scapegoat for all of Skellige" is an interesting take that I didn't read myself, and didn't read any more into than any other plot line in the game. They wrote the story the way they did for reasons we cannot confirm, but to say it's misogynistic without much basis other than personal experience and go "hey man that's just how I read it" I feel is already disingenuous."


Probably all of this is the condescending part. Telling a non-binary woman about their own experiences is actually not a great way to have any kind of conversation.

 

affeinvasion

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,646
I think there's always a tension between depicting the oppressive nature of a fictional world in order to critique it and falling into those tropes in a problematic way.

Sorceresses are the most interesting part of the entire Witcher universe and they are complicated in terms of utilizing their sexuality in order to gain power within patriarchal courts. I don't know how you depict sorceresses in this world without the overt sexualization. My biggest problem comes from their interactions with Geralt. In a game that is meant to be a power fantasy, having your male protagonist also be a desirable (literally) tingly sex machine, lessens the agency of the complicated women who do otherwise have interesting characterizations.
 

His Majesty

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,651
Belgium
Can't remember the character's name, but the treatment of the cross dresser was pretty gross, too. It's also completely out of character for Geralt, a dude who empathizes with literal monsters, to be weirded out by him.
In what way is it gross? Elihal is portrayed as a reasonable character, Geralt doesn't make fun of him and the game presents a positive view about crossdressing. Elihal is given a voice, Geralt is not judgemental and his slight confusion clearly stems from the fact that he is researching Dandelion's supposed girlfriends and he comes across a man. I just rewatched the dialogue and can't really find anything that points towards the game ridiculing crossdressing?
 

Spinluck

Avenger
Oct 26, 2017
15,294
Yeah they still have some strides to make.

I say this as someone who enjoyed most of what TW3 offered and still hasn't touched the DLC.