Is Swtor sexist?

[JHawx]

Ok, lets settle this once and for all.

1. The costumes are movie approperiate and accurate to the SW lore.

2. Theres more nudity in the general beach than on this game, do mind you that "NUDE" by forbes dictionary definition means "not covering/covered at all" meaning if theres a bikini with a loincloth, it is not a nude/naked image.

3. i repeat but it seems important: Nude and naked means same thing, meaning there are no clothing or covering article on the model it was posed on, it means you are in afform whistl you came to birth. No clothing, fibers, furs or plants covering you up.

4. you see more nudity and bellybuttons in the school than on the game.

5. you can take off all your armor and see as much skin on female character.

6. While issue is more sensitive in US, european standards are more relaxed. On US if you are wearing a tanktop and boxers is considered scandalous to some, try imagining a man with a tangas and no shirt being normal underwear on EU area. That is still more than what game is showing.

 

Really, there are no costumes in the game that would be r-12 in the game. You are being paranoid about it, its funny that it is more propable that a 16 year old is posting these topics, as he is more aware that the imagenery of the game launches his hormones and insecurity. 12 year old might not be yet thinking of these issues the same way... And i find it funny really, but in reality, if you want to see more real skin and girls, go to the beach.

 

and as in the previous post, slave females were used for entertainment, same way as in early days of rome. Men being stronger, were better suitable for LABOR than entertaiment.

Edited February 1, 2012 by JHawx

[JDTC]

slave girl outfits = BW degrades women

 

women dont flirt as often = BW degrades women

 

 

jesus nvm i didnt read this thread before replying, i want out

Edited February 1, 2012 by JDTC

[JHawx]

slave girl outfits = BW degrades women

 

women dont flirt as often = BW degrades women

 

 

jesus nvm i didnt read this thread before replying, i want out

 

again, beating a dead horse here, i can see more scandalous bikinis out the beach, than on the game. if women are choosing to wear these kinds of bikinis of theyr choise, your clearly double standarding feminist propaganda here.

it is covering anything inportant isnt it? or should women wear leg covering 40s bathing suits so they dont show ankle? I thought our civilisation grew out of this kind of thing allready.

[Sufran]

Ok, lets settle this once and for all.

1. The costumes are movie approperiate and accurate to the SW lore.

2. Theres more nudity in the general beach than on this game, do mind you that "NUDE" by forbes dictionary definition means "not covering/covered at all" meaning if theres a bikini with a loincloth, it is not a nude/naked image.

3. i repeat but it seems important: Nude and naked means same thing, meaning there are no clothing or covering article on the model it was posed on, it means you are in afform whistl you came to birth. No clothing, fibers, furs or plants covering you up.

4. you see more nudity and bellybuttons in the school than on the game.

5. you can take off all your armor and see as much skin on female character.

6. While issue is more sensitive in US, european standards are more relaxed. On US if you are wearing a tanktop and boxers is considered scandalous to some, try imagining a man with a tangas and no shirt being normal underwear on EU area. That is still more than what game is showing.

 

Really, there are no costumes in the game that would be r-12 in the game. You are being paranoid about it, its funny that it is more propable that a 16 year old is posting these topics, as he is more aware that the imagenery of the game launches his hormones and insecurity. 12 year old might not be yet thinking of these issues the same way... And i find it funny really, but in reality, if you want to see more real skin and girls, go to the beach.

 

and as in the previous post, slave females were used for entertainment, same way as in early days of rome. Men being stronger, were better suitable for LABOR than entertaiment.

In my view, the majority of your post is completely irrelevant and illogical as it relies on a straw-man. Specifically, stating ‘you could see more nudity elsewhere' has absolutely nothing to do with the issue in question as people seem to be focusing upon the lack of equal potential for such things. If your analogy is used, you’d see equally nude men at the beach too . The opening post doesn’t focus on saying “oh my, a lack of clothes proves sexism,” it deals with equal capacity to access such outfits and how the disparity shows it. It isn't even as if the players can choose outfits and self-generate such disparities, there's simply no alternative (wearing nothing isn't an alternative, you can't place modifications into nothing).

 

Beyond that, you seem to commit the typical fallacy of suggesting that ‘mature’ people reconcile themselves with society irrespective of its composition and rely on the notion that X is worse thus Y is suddenly acceptable. As for your reference to the Romans, that’s utterly irrelevant to the Star Wars universe as the mere existence of slavery doesn’t mean that they’ll be utilised in the same manner due to technological and social differences.

 

The one argument that has merit is the fact that the outfit possibilities are appropriate to the films, but I think that’s undermined by pointing out that absence does not preclude introduction in the future. Equally, I still don’t think that sexism was included intentionally for dramatic effect by whoever was, and is, responsible for story composition. I think it was latent in nature and entered the story via the implicit social values of the story-creators, whether male or female. Of course, that remains speculative.

 

In conclusion, did you even read the topic prior to posting?

Edited February 1, 2012 by Sufran

[JHawx]

no we are talking about coverage and sensuality of worn costumes in the game.

and if the topic is equalled for male characters, this is what we would see...

[spoiler=may contain sexually offensive material.]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_9mbeNGtJZeQ/TPlFXIjZhOI/AAAAAAAAJpY/IyJ2ytZHE6o/s400/mankini.png

 

 

Is this really what you want to see in a game, male entertainment slaves? not propable, as i said, they would be more use in dilithium mines on endors moon, than on a cantina. Sadly, THIS is more propable and according to starwars lore.

and yes, i did read the d**n topic and sublying reasons of it. Game follows SW lore, and on sw lore, there were slave girls in skanky uniforms entertaining cantina patrons on dancefloors. Most famous of em were twilegs, but as we see in starwars movies, there were other races aswell.

 

let me ask you this: how much coverage is on regular bikini? vs. leias slave bikini?, to me, slave girl metal golden bikini covers lot more than regular one.

 

let me mind you tha you purposly bypassed the issue of women willingly wearing less covering bikinis on public places, and you claim the outfit worn on the game, designed over 20-25 years ago is more scandalous and degenerating to the women population... if they would think it is degenerating to them, then why on earth are they 1. buyin em, 2. wearing em 3. enjoying em??? Your posting a double standard, and i am having hard time accepting it. Sure, i DO wear speedos when i swim, so what? if somebody wants to see my tubby round midweist, so what? i am covering anything of importance.

 

As long as they dont show ni***s, aeola, pubic hear, a**cr**k, genitalia or cameltoe, i dont see the problem here. Anything considerable being sexual content is satisfied by covering it up with article of clothing.

 

p.s. seems like even cencorship filter is pointing out discussing these invisible regions are not suitable to be spoken off...

Edited February 1, 2012 by JHawx

[Thecooljason]

You're writing that from a position of privilege and demonstrating a general lack of understanding of the subject of privilege. It's very interesting to learn about, and if you're interested in finding out why people disagree with you, and where your argument is flawed (aside from equating a minority wanting to be included with a minority wanting to exclude people), I'd suggest you look it up. If you're not terribly interested, then oh well, I'm not going to argue you, as I've seen the road that goes down in the pre-forum-wipe SGRA thread over many many iterations, and I've no desire to get this thread locked.

 

I am in the majority this time, true. But that does not mean that I cannot understand what it feels like to be in the minority. You treat my opinion like I am uneducated and it is morally wrong. Its sounds like you think if I did a little research it would change. But I am an educated person, I have taken sociology classes, and I do have understanding about privilege.

 

I would restate that you are confusing rights with entitlements. Everyone can play this game. But that doesn't make everyone entitled to have it catered to them.

Edited February 1, 2012 by Thecooljason

[shreddster]

It amuses me that so many individuals are willing to rely on subjective arguments of personal preference in order to justify the limitations of choices for others.

 

Subjectivity is inherent within every argument, not just this one.

 

I can only presume they think they’re entitled to do such via majoritarian thinking rather than libertarian

 

Oh, please excuse me, your majesty.... I forgot that all individuals who don't support 100 percent egalitarianism aren't allowed to have opinions.

 

, thus I’m very happy to know that I can interfere in the game and life choices of others if I get sufficient numbers of people to support me. It won’t matter if the feature is a ‘choice’ that I can bypass; not wanting to see it is apparently sufficient reason.

It's not the choice that I don't want to see. It's the inevitable result of the choice that I don't want to see. And the only way for that to happen, is to stop it at the source.

 

 

As for SW:TOR being sexist, I regard Star Wars as a whole as sexist thus it makes sense for TOR to emulate that to some degree but I also think the entire gaming domain is saturated with immature male insecurity.

 

Exactly how does "insecurity" play any part in it? For someone who saturates their arguments with incomprehensible, yet elegant prose, I have a suspicion you don't know what "insecurity" means.

 

It is entirely possible that this is simply derived from confirmation bias

 

What...?

 

but the slavery, torture, etc seems far more overt in nature than the sexism. It’s as if sexism, both now and in the original films, was latent and unconscious in nature due to the social values of the time rather than an intentionally selected story-element. Of course, that’s speculative.

 

Granted.

 

Whilst extreme sexual dimorphism renders males and females absurd, the sexualisation of women is almost always far greater by virtue of lower quantities of body-covering outfits in relation to men. It would appear that so many people are either incapable of seeing it or choose not to for egotistical reasons.

 

Or perhaps it's simply NOT THAT BIG OF A DEAL.

 

Personally, I can’t wait for a major MMO that embraces all choices and truly attempts to take advantage of the increasing market share attributable to women and minority groups.

 

I imagine you'll be waiting a while.

 

It is entirely speculative but I expect that a game that manages to truly purge rigid social roles and the drooling, fawning, belittling ‘herr herr, Guy-In-Real-Life’ attitude will be highly successful via its decreased reliance on immature males.

 

Generalization and stereotyping...? I expected more out of this.

 

It’s very easy to blame the game or players in isolation from each other but there’s feedback and many variables, such as the composition of the development team and the respective beliefs of its members, thus I blame both for not being willing to take some responsibility or to risk something new.

 

Well, when you have profits to consider.....

 

 

Ultimately, I have no problem with sexualisation but only if each sex has equal opportunity for that. One might argue that it is a fantasy world thus it doesn’t need to be ‘equalised’ but there’s a reason that rampant racism, homophobia, etc aren’t prevalent in gaming whilst objectification of women is; the composition is derived from the perceived social values of the audience and its creators.

 

Exactly. Thank you for bolstering my argument.

 

In reality, it is always small groups that change the masses or spark dormant feelings rather than the ‘majority’ imposing their will as the majority are ‘cattle’ and ‘moral slaves,’ as Nietzsche put it.

 

Ahh.. but you're thinking politically. This is not a political issue.

 

Any change is inevitably viral in nature. Consequently, I’m hoping change in this domain can be sparked by developers willing to try that path. For me, any game that crafts a fantasy social structure with complete silent equality will get my custom over something akin to this.

Start the clock. Let me know how that goes.

 

Majoritarianism is irrelevant when the majority get swept up in change and are persuaded so easily. If ochlocracy were a reality in every nation then nothing would change as the static majority would always prevent it. Fortunately, that isn’t the case as per the above. I would argue that the de facto oligarchies render the majority a minor factor, but that's another discussion. I would hardly place much stock in the whims of the mobile vulgus as justification for anything because the very values they supposedly threaten to impose via force (how anyone can claim to speak on their behalf without rigorous evidence, I'll never know) are shifting constantly due to new inputs. I'll always regard the idea that the 'majority wants it' as an easily rectified argumentum ad populum that can be overturned with logic due to the inherent desire to avoid cognitive dissonance.

 

You're assuming that every individual who states that the majority is in favor believes in that FACT without doubt. As I have stated, that is an opinion. Whether that is true remains to be seen. Personally, I stand behind it, because I am convinced that it is a majority presence; however, in response to you, I'd remind you that just because I believe the majority is on my side doesn't mean I believe that gives me the right to speak out. I believe in my right to speak out not because I'm a part of the majority or because my argument is the most "logical." My right to speak out has a fundamental reasoning, and that is that I am in total opposition to this suggestion.

 

I have a position, and granted it isn't based solely on objectivity; however, someone has to have the courage to speak out against this 'logic' that you proponents so readily abuse to bolster your arguments.

 

Someone has to stand up and say, "Absolutely not!"

[Sufran]

no we are talking about coverage and sensuality of worn costumes in the game.

You may be, I don’t think that’s the point of the opening post or most of the posts in this topic. In fact, I would suggest that the tone strongly suggests they’re focused on remedying the disparity in available clothing options and [Flirt] choices rather than on lambasting Bioware for allowing sexualisation at all.

 

and if the topic is equalled for male characters, this is what we would see...

[spoiler=may contain sexually offensive material.]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_9mbeNGtJZeQ/TPlFXIjZhOI/AAAAAAAAJpY/IyJ2ytZHE6o/s400/mankini.png

 

Is this really what you want to see in a game, male entertainment slaves? not probable,

Why should my preferences matter? See above as to why I deem that a useless path of reasoning. It’s very clear that every preference is subjective thus, provided that there is no direct violation of my sovereignty and I’m not forced to wear such outfits, why should I have any say over it whatsoever? It is supreme arrogance to expect to interfere in the enjoyment and choices of others because you don’t like it. Having said that, if you’re willing to let others that don’t like the height, sex, hair colour, outfit colour, eye colour, etc impose their will by demanding that such options be omitted in future content or removed from the present then I’ll retract that criticism. However, I sincerely doubt that you genuinely have such a position as I'm yet to meet a person that uses the 'I don't want to look it' argument that applies the same standard to their own preferences.

 

As i said, they would be more use in dilithium mines on endors moon, than on a cantina. Sadly, THIS is more propable and according to starwars lore.

Firstly, I still don’t regard this as relevant since absence cannot be equated with prohibition. Equally, the social function of men and women is utterly irrelevant to their choices of personal attire. Further, what evidence have you based this on when there are cybernetics, droids, adrenals, stims, genetic engineering, and innumerable other technological measures to reduce disparities? In an entire galaxy that we’ve only ever seen a fraction of in any form of canon material, I fail to see how you can categorically make a statement of probability. In my mind, the sheer scope of the Star Wars universe allows for considerable adaptation if the story-writers desire due to the plethora of cultures they can create or reference. Conversely, that option is ruled out if they included the disparity as an intentional dramatic device akin to slavery or torture rather than by virtue of their imaginations being limited by socialised values of the time/relevant social group. If they did, then I’ll have no problem and accept that as I have accepted the slavery, torture, and xenophobia as plot devices.

 

Finally, I’ve just noticed you’ve edited your post considerably since I began typing and I have no idea what your diatribe means anymore. I can only conclude that you’ve been a successful troll as I make no statement on the capacity of men and women to choose sexualisation or the ‘scandalised’ nature of the bikini. I wouldn’t care less how sexualised both sexes are provided that they have equal capacity for it so I have no idea where you’re deriving this vaunted ‘double standard.’ If people choose to sexualise their female characters more than males when the option arises then that is a problem derived from real-life social values, thus any debate has to take place there.

[Thecooljason]

Everyone can play this game. That doesn't mean that they are entitled to have it catered to them.

[shreddster]

Everyone can play this game. That doesn't mean that they are entitled to have it catered to them.

 

Thank you.

[shreddster]

You may be, I don’t think that’s the point of the opening post or most of the posts in this topic. In fact, I would suggest that the tone strongly suggests they’re focused on remedying the disparity in available clothing options and [Flirt] choices rather than on lambasting Bioware for allowing sexualisation at all.

 

 

Why should my preferences matter? See above as to why I deem that a useless path of reasoning. It’s very clear that every preference is subjective thus, provided that there is no direct violation of my sovereignty and I’m not forced to wear such outfits, why should I have any say over it whatsoever? It is supreme arrogance to expect to interfere in the enjoyment and choices of others because you don’t like it. Having said that, if you’re willing to let others that don’t like the height, sex, hair colour, outfit colour, eye colour, etc impose their will by demanding that such options be omitted in future content or removed from the present then I’ll retract that criticism. However, I sincerely doubt that you genuinely have such a position as I'm yet to meet a person that uses the 'I don't want to look it' argument that applies the same standard to their own preferences.

 

 

Firstly, I still don’t regard this as relevant since absence cannot be equated with prohibition. Equally, the social function of men and women is utterly irrelevant to their choices of personal attire. Further, what evidence have you based this on when there are cybernetics, droids, adrenals, stims, genetic engineering, and innumerable other technological measures to reduce disparities? In an entire galaxy that we’ve only ever seen a fraction of in any form of canon material, I fail to see how you can categorically make a statement of probability. In my mind, the sheer scope of the Star Wars universe allows for considerable adaptation if the story-writers desire due to the plethora of cultures they can create or reference. Conversely, that option is ruled out if they included the disparity as an intentional dramatic device akin to slavery or torture rather than by virtue of their imaginations being limited by socialised values of the time/relevant social group. If they did, then I’ll have no problem and accept that as I have accepted the slavery, torture, and xenophobia as plot devices.

 

Finally, I’ve just noticed you’ve edited your post considerably since I began typing and I have no idea what your diatribe means anymore. I can only conclude that you’ve been a successful troll as I make no statement on the capacity of men and women to choose sexualisation or the ‘scandalised’ nature of the bikini. I wouldn’t care less how sexualised both sexes are provided that they have equal capacity for it so I have no idea where you’re deriving this vaunted ‘double standard.’ If people choose to sexualise their female characters more than males when the option arises then that is a problem derived from real-life social values, thus any debate has to take place there.

 

You've missed the point of this thread, completely. This is not about fairness, equality or justice. I think we can agree that equal sexualisation or the lack thereof is fair. However, the positions stated in this thread are based on OPINION, NOT REASONING. There is a general consensus of what is considered equal and fair. That is not what is happening here. Please, take your incomprehensible babble elsewhere. I'm sure most of us don't want to read about whatever logical fallacies you googled or remembered from philosophy class.

 

This is an argument of opinions. Granted, in a thread like this, no one side is going to win, and no side is going to back down. That's how these work.

[plusieurs]

I am in the majority this time, true. But that does not mean that I cannot understand what it feels like to be in the minority. You treat my opinion like I am uneducated and it is morally wrong. Its sounds like you think if I did a little research it would change. But I am an educated person, I have taken sociology classes, and I do have understanding about privilege.

 

I would restate that you are confusing rights with entitlements. Everyone can play this game. But that doesn't make everyone entitled to have it catered to them.

 

That's the thing, though. I'm not talking about rights or entitlements. I am not saying that THIS NEEDS TO BE IN GAME. I am saying that the opinion that the majority gets its way 100% and that everyone else should just be happy that they have anything at all (where it overlaps with the will of the majority) is a privileged statement.

 

I am not saying that you are uneducated. You could be have a PhD in biochemistry for all I can tell, but that doesn't mean that you're automatically familiar with the concept of privilege.

 

I am not saying that your opinion is morally wrong. I am pointing out why people will disagree with you, and why you should not be shocked when people say that you're showing a privileged opinion.

[Sufran]

Subjectivity is inherent within every argument, not just this one.

In my view, levels of subjectivity vary and this argument is highly reliant on subjectivity. Of course, you could use metaphysical whimsy, solipsistic silliness, and extreme Cartesian doubt in order to suggest that even the material is unknowable, thus subjective too, but who actually does that?

 

However, whether subjectivity is inherent to any argument is quite different to determining whether or not such variability should be sufficient reason to impose on others or whether we should omit subjective preferences entirely via an absolutist principle.

 

 

Oh, please excuse me, your majesty.... I forgot that all individuals who don't support 100 percent egalitarianism aren't allowed to have opinions.

Firstly, mocking ad hominem attacks are frivolous, I would ask that you refrain. Secondly, whilst there is overlap, libertarianism and egalitarianism are complete contrasts in many areas. Consequently, don’t presume that I think you ‘aren’t allowed to have opinions.’ In fact, the libertarian attitude is that the right to speak is always worth preserving, even if you fundamentally disagree.

 

In fact, I think majoritarian attitudes actually undermine the point you’re trying to make here as it is when libertarian attitudes to individual sovereignty aren’t applied that you cease to have an inviolable right to an opinion. If you allow an ochlocracy to rise and use mob strength to justify the exclusion or acceptance of preferences then nobody is inherently ‘allowed to have opinions,’ the mob can simply rule otherwise.

 

It's not the choice that I don't want to see. It's the inevitable result of the choice that I don't want to see. And the only way for that to happen, is to stop it at the source.

I regard this as pedantry; your ultimate motivation remains the same but simply has an additional step added to the causal sequence. You dislike something due to personal preference and wish to avoid that ‘result,’ that remains true irrespective of how you phrase it.

 

Exactly how does "insecurity" play any part in it? For someone who saturates their arguments with incomprehensible, yet elegant prose, I have a suspicion you don't know what "insecurity" means

I apologise for failing to elaborate further, my usage of ‘insecurity’ was due to the fact that games notoriously defer to objectification for females via choices such as dedicating a curious amount of resources to the physics of breasts, the size of/focus on secondary sexual characteristics, proportions of revealing outfits, etc. It has been shown in previous journal articles (several years old, I can't recall the article or citations) that such excessive emphasis on gender disparity and sexualisation is to avoid conflicting with the 'macho' basis to identity.

 

Consequently, if somebody is made uncomfortable when games become more representative and reflective of society, actual or idealised, then I can only conclude that they have some kind of identity insecurity. Naturally, that’s speculative but it was one word in an entire argument, you’re being excessively pedantic. Perhaps I should have said ‘male entitlement’ or 'patriarchal remnants.'

 

Equally, I don’t mean to suggest that such ‘insecurity’ is the only motivation for opposition or that such insecurity is the sole problem.

 

What...?

I meant that it is conceivable that my opinion has been influenced by confirmation bias i.e. my observations are influenced by expectations. This is true of anyone outside of a scientifically rigorous environment.

 

Or perhaps it's simply NOT THAT BIG OF A DEAL.

I would direct you to the comment about those not experiencing such disparities or those that haven’t successfully empathised with such experiences being inherently unable to see any ‘problem.’ For those in a position untouched by the relevant issue, it will always seem like it’s ‘not a big deal.’ If you compare it to starvation in Africa or the depletion of the Earth’s resources, then it isn’t ‘big’ in objective terms but that doesn’t make it any more acceptable or unworthy of attention.

 

Generalization and stereotyping...? I expected more out of this.

I did not suggest that the entirety of the MMO population was predisposed to that, or even the majority. I merely meant to convey the notion that it is irritating when the perspective mentioned in the post you quoted is accommodated to such an excessive extent. Naturally, that’s a matter of personal perception but there are many articles and studies into this area, you only need to look at sexist platitudes that still exist (there are no women on the internet, Guy-In-Real-Life, and the gaming studies that show how uncomfortable women are made to feel when their gender becomes known) in order to get a glimpse.

 

As for expecting more, you’re the one using ad hominem argumentation.

Ahh.. but you're thinking politically. This is not a political issue.

I regard this as a startlingly inaccurate observation since everything is political in nature, and this most certainly is by virtue of being a product entered into the public sphere for members of the public to engage with. You cannot simply compartmentalise things in such a manner, there isn’t a single area of your life that isn’t affected by politics. Consequently, I think it is perfectly acceptable to use the same concepts as seen in political philosophy or public policy debates.

 

Start the clock. Let me know how that goes.

I did use ‘hoping’ and emotive notions such as being unable to ‘wait’ for a reason, it was speculative and I made no comment on the probability of such a product arising. I simply know that I’ll try to influence them towards that in whatever small way I can.

 

You're assuming that every individual who states that the majority is in favor believes in that FACT without doubt. As I have stated, that is an opinion. Whether that is true remains to be seen. Personally, I stand behind it, because I am convinced that it is a majority presence; however, in response to you, I'd remind you that just because I believe the majority is on my side doesn't mean I believe that gives me the right to speak out. I believe in my right to speak out not because I'm a part of the majority or because my argument is the most "logical." My right to speak out has a fundamental reasoning, and that is that I am in total opposition to this suggestion.

 

I have a position, and granted it isn't based solely on objectivity; however, someone has to have the courage to speak out against this 'logic' that you proponents so readily abuse to bolster your arguments.

 

Someone has to stand up and say, "Absolutely not!"

Firstly, I fail to see whatever distinction you’re making between ‘fact’ and ‘opinion’ because anything you say, by virtue of you saying it, is an opinion. Consequently, if somebody uses majoritarianism as a basis for their argument, I will attack that. I do not ‘assume’ anything beyond that they have asserted it. Equally, it would hardly be consistent if I thought that people can only speak out if the majority is on their ‘side’ as the right to express is wholly independent of that for me, it's another matter entirely if people then attempt to use majoritarianism as justification for that opinion.

 

Further, I’m afraid I regard this as a poor attempt to veil the fact that you are simply trying to foist your preferences on to the choices of others. There is no principle to ‘stand up’ for and defend. I fail to see how I’m ‘abusing’ logic to ‘bolster’ the argument, please feel free to read anything subsequent to, and inclusive of, Hobbes to appreciate the elegance of social libertarianism as means via which we can consistently decide the appropriateness of prohibiting or accommodating choices in a principled manner.

 

Anything less is absurdly arbitrary in nature because it places no boundaries and would inevitably be conducive to conflict. I wonder how many people have said ‘absolutely not’ because they were ‘in total opposition’ to the possibility of social choices that we now regard as perfectly permissible due their concordance with individual autonomy and inviolability. As you so rightly identified, if it isn’t ‘based solely on objectivity’ in the sense of procedural fairness then anybody can try to impose on any other for whatever reason they wish. It isn’t ‘courage’ to happily engage in that whenever it benefits you.

 

You've missed the point of this thread, completely. This is not about fairness, equality or justice. I think we can agree that equal sexualisation or the lack thereof is fair. However, the positions stated in this thread are based on OPINION, NOT REASONING. There is a general consensus of what is considered equal and fair. That is not what is happening here.

 

I’m afraid this may be my cynicism, but I view this as a transparent attempt to falsely change the parameters of the debate in order to nullify your opposition. I also think it is utterly incomprehensible to try to distinguish ‘reasoning’ from opinion, what on Earth are opinions based upon then? Gut instinct? Even if emotive in nature, there is underlying reasoning causing that emotional reaction. For instance, a person may vehemently oppose changes to the status quo due to the inherent risk associated with change. If a person then enters their opinion into a public sphere, others are perfectly able to dissect it and attempt to question the reasoning in whatever manner they wish. If people have opinions based on incomplete reasoning then that’s their will, but I won’t respect it.

 

It is you that has misunderstood the purpose of this topic, the opening post contains the following:” Why can't I dress up my male companion - and myself for that matter - in fun and sexy gear?” Furthermore, the post details the disparity in [Flirt] options. This clearly pertains to the subject of ‘equal and fair’ opportunity for sexualisation. As far as I have seen, no contributor has acknowledged that this would be fair, thus should be included, but they are opposed. If they were to claim it would be fair but oppose it anyway then that is complete hypocrisy. Personally, I won't enjoy seeing either sex wearing revealing outfits but I'm not one to impose my views on others simply because I don't like it (provided that it doesn't directly violate my sphere of influence, and this doesn't).

 

Please, take your incomprehensible babble elsewhere. I'm sure most of us don't want to read about whatever logical fallacies you googled or remembered from philosophy class.

I will not take my ‘incomprehensible babble’ elsewhere, I have the capacity to participate here and will. If you wish to rely on ad hominem argumentation and dislike reading it then don’t bother engaging with it. As a libertarian, I respect your right to choose that path whereas a majoritarian wouldn’t, how ironic. The very fact you’re trying to encourage me to leave and even guess what ‘most’ people want reveals a great, great deal. I don’t care if this is incomprehensible to you; it is entered in case others wish to take the time to read it. I don’t care how probable or improbable that is.

 

Everyone can play this game. That doesn't mean that they are entitled to have it catered to them.

As consumers, they are more than able to utilise the Suggestion area for this purpose. I’m using this medium to argue that removal of disparities via the introduction of mirrored options is the appropriate thing to do, you’re arguing the converse. You have no innate authority simply due to the game’s present incarnation. As stated earlier, it is never the masses that change things spontaneously but small, dedicated groups that grow, merge, and persist hence people can, and are, using this area to that end. They may not be ‘entitled’ to accommodation but those that wish to gain accommodation can ceaselessly argue as to why it should be the dominant, applied view in the hope that discourse will achieve their desired end.

Edited February 1, 2012 by Sufran

[Sarfux]

seriously...you actually think of something like this...seriously?

 

what do you have a politically correct mind or something?

 

go say hi to stalin for me

[Templeman]

1. There is no doubt in my mind that the majority of players of this game are heterosexual males. As such, they are not going to want to be subjected to images containing homosexual themes (whether that's your intention or not is irrelevant.)

 

2. This is exactly the kind of implementation that would lead to excessive amounts of trolling and deteriorate immersion in the Star Wars universe.

 

How, you might ask?

 

I really don't need to explain the troll part, but first off, no Jedi or Sith that I've ever heard of would wear "skimpy" clothing.

 

I find it bothering that you so easily ignore even the possibility of female sexuality and assume that any "sexy" outfits on the men must be homosexual themes... I also find your fear that anything that might somehow have "homosexual themes" is going to bite you or something funny as hell.

Protip~ Stop caring so much about what someone who is gay might find attractive....unless your looking to pick someone up

 

I like the armor the OP linked and would put it on my toon when PvPing.

Also if women want some beefcake to go along with my cheesecake then I am cool with that.

 

Anyway something I want to toss out that means nothing really but. Of all the people in real life I know playing. Only the women have made toons just to run around in that armor.

[TerrorTigr]

Short answer: yes.

 

Long answer: our entire society is still sexist. Compare to the rest of what is going on in our culture, I would argue that The Old Republic, and most videogames for that matter, are fairly egalitarian-- in part because they write stories that can be played out be either gender, which reinforces the idea that gender is a societal construct. It also gives you with some of the best stories in western society that have ******, strong female characters that are never sexualized or objectifed-- because the same story can also be played as a male character, using the same dialogue.

 

Yes, our society is still very sexist.

 

No, neither SWTOR nor videogames in general are an exception. In fact, video games and geekdom are even more sexist than our society in general.

 

The main reason why female player characters are equal in almost all ways to male characters is balance. There's no reason to alienate the minority of female players, and male players play female characters too.

 

Now, why do they do that? Sure, for some it's roleplay, but the reason I hear most often is, in the words of somebody who was, at least, honest: "If I'm staring at somebody's *** for hundreds of hours, it might as well be a hot ***." Objectification 101.

 

Equal in almost all ways, I said. Contrary to male player characters, female characters are always (potential) sex objects. Slave girl bikinis, bare midriffs on armor that is perfectly normal on male characters and other sexy outfits, D-cup breasts as the absolute minimum of what's tolerated, even on the "juvenile" body type 1, the list goes on and on. If a game lets you play a female, it's always a "hot" one. Compare male and female body type 4, please. Then tell me how many female 3s and 4s you actually meet ingame.

 

NPCs show the sexist thinking in character, as well: a plethora of stereotyped damsels-in-distress, scheming evil witches and others do nothing if not reinforce the woman as the helpless victim, willing sex object or the evil usurper of male power. Exceptions are rare.

 

Add to that the treatment of women in gamer culture. In an MMO, she has to either pretend she's a guy or she'll be harassed out of her mind. Obviously, she can't play anything but a healer, and if she does, well, everybody smiles and tries not to tell her that, being a girl, they don't have high hopes for her. At conventions, she is either naturally pretty/cute, dresses in a ****ty (objectifying) cosplay outfit, or nobody will be interested.

 

I'm not saying everybody is like that, but video games are a very strongly male-dominated social sphere and developers catering to the "***** single teens" market with Lara Croft and her Double-D-Legacy did not improve things.

[Djinas]

They can add skimpy male armor, I really don't care. Probably females wanna see some skin too or people that play on the other team .

At some point in the sith warr story quinn and lieutenant pierce showed up in their underwear during holo calls, while darth whatever his name is was on my ship.

Now, it was a bit disturbing and the question of what they were doing there like that came to mind. Ofc, it's probably a display bug, and I found it funny as hell.

For clarification, I am a male and all my characters are female, cause I like looking at their *** while playing. Tar n feather me, that's the way it is.

Waiting for same sex romance for my companions also >, for obvious reasons.

[Ixum]

Still no real arugments in this thread for some skin showing male gear to be implemented. Most of the negative and hostile comments have a strong "NO! You can't have coz I don't wanna risk having gay feelings" vibe to them. Sorry, thats just how it seems to me.

 

Immersion is not a problem, male characters have the option to take their clothes of and do /getdown in any situation, I personally tend to do this while waiting for a WZ to start. So far nobody has told me they find it disturbing, a reason to quit the game or a reason for them to report me for making them insta-homosexual.

 

I have to say the suggested gladiator costume - with it's armor and helmet etc - is very far far away in amount of bare skin shown compared to the female costume. For those who havent seen the female dancer costume please have a look at the link below.

 

http://sweet.pp.fi/imperialdancer.jpg

[Udolpho]

It's sexist.

Personally, I think:

 

If there's skimpy armor in existence, it should be wearable by males and females and look pretty much identical. Doesn't matter gender, race or body type.

 

If there is a flirt out there, it should be available for all characters, whatever gender they are, whatever gender the npc is. It's up to you if you want to say it or not.

 

If there's dancers out there, some of them should be male. I'm cool with there being a mix, but having one or two known gay or lesbian cantinas would be fine by me too. That holo dancer, you should be able to toggle male/female.

 

etc.

 

Really don't know why people have problems with these ideas. They're not implemented, so I can't do much except scratch my head and go hrm.

Seems that they might be afraid of upsetting their target audience of straight teen-aged males. That's too bad, but their decision/choice.

[Felioats]

Heck with that. I want my Type 4 male in a dancer's outfit. I thought Bioware was GLBT-friendly?

[TerrorTigr]

Heck with that. I want my Type 4 male in a dancer's outfit. I thought Bioware was GLBT-friendly?

 

I'm not sure what you're referring to, since I haven't played any of the Mass Effect titles. All I've heard about was one or more lesbian scene(s) in there. I never heard of male gay scenes in ME, so that would be sexist and objectifying right there, using a "hot ****** scene" to capture mostly male audiences. If there were male gay scenes then the fault lies with the media's treatment of the game, not with the game itself, I guess.

 

Also, make sure to keep two things apart here: One topic is "Attractive/sexy masculine armor for male characters please". The other is "Drag for male characters please".

 

The first is difficult, as there's only so much you can do in that regard, apart from shirtless gladiator kinda things. We men don't have that much choice in "sexy" outfits in western culture. It starts looking goofy real fast.

The second is not going to happen in a title that wants to keep its "T for Teen" rating. No because of Bioware, but because of "concerned citizens".

[plusieurs]

I'm not sure what you're referring to, since I haven't played any of the Mass Effect titles. All I've heard about was one or more lesbian scene(s) in there. I never heard of male gay scenes in ME, so that would be sexist and objectifying right there, using a "hot ****** scene" to capture mostly male audiences. If there were male gay scenes then the fault lies with the media's treatment of the game, not with the game itself, I guess.

 

Dragon Age had it in spades.

 

Also, there's supposedly going to be M/M in ME3

[el_pinko_grande]

First, I do think the game needs more Flirt options for female characters. Now, I'm a heterosexual male, so I have no horse in this race. But I have a female SW and everytime a Flirt option came up, I felt pretty bad for any girls that might be playing the class, because invariably the dudes in question were fugly as hell.

 

Now, as for the whole Majority vs Minority thing, y'all realize this same logic applies to other parts of the game, right? If the majority of players are PvEers, does that mean that the designers should ignore the desires of the PvP community? After all, developer time being devoted to PvP content could instead be used to building new raids or something. Hence, as a PvE Care Bear type, I'm actively harmed by the devs seeing to the needs of the PvP community. I wouldn't complain about that, though, because I understand that in a AAA title like this, a large player base ultimately is to my benefit.

 

As for the subject of skimpy armor, I think the game needs more of it. Like, I'm leveling my Jedi Guardian, and I'd like to dress Kira in something pleasing to the eye, but there's like no middle ground between the slave girl bikini and the whole "Flying Nun" look that female Jedi Consulars have forced on them. And since I don't want to be the guy who runs around with his companions in bikinis, I'm stuck with the Flying Nun.

 

Which brings me to the subject of skimpy armor for men. I'm fine with it. What do I care if girls and gay men get some eye candy? I mean, I don't think the devs should be creating Speedo-type armor for Juggernauts, but if they want to make something like what Darth Sion wore in KotOR 2, I'd be fine with that.

 

One last point- there seems to be an assumption that the majority of players are white heterosexual males. I doubt that this is true. They're probably the biggest group, sure, but I don't think they constitute an outright majority. Most of my guild, for instance, is Asian. Plus we have two gay dudes, and a couple girls. We're probably more diverse than most, but I don't think we're as far out of the norm as a lot of you would think. And I say this as a heterosexual white guy myself.

[Felioats]

I'm not sure what you're referring to, since I haven't played any of the Mass Effect titles. All I've heard about was one or more lesbian scene(s) in there. I never heard of male gay scenes in ME, so that would be sexist and objectifying right there, using a "hot ****** scene" to capture mostly male audiences. If there were male gay scenes then the fault lies with the media's treatment of the game, not with the game itself, I guess.

 

I was being halfway tongue in cheek, and not to derail the thread, but to clarify for you, Dragon Age 1 & 2 have man-on-man action. In fact, in Dragon Age 2, all of the romanceable characters are bisexual.

[TheHunterC]

No it isn't. Don't question it