Don't you think bringing rape into this discussion is a little over the top? I mean, come on. Obviously rape is bad, m'kay? And using someone looks or clothing as an excuse to sexually harass them is also bad, m'kay? That is (obviously) not what I was talking about either.

There are plenty of douchemuffins in the world who look at a girl in a tight shirt and short shorts and see the way she dresses as an excuse to grab their ass or throw obnoxious sexual advances their way. Because 'she obviously wants it, right?'. That is objectification. Because there's telling someone they're attractive/hot and there's making assumptions based on said attractiveness.

On the other side of the fence there will even be douchemuffins who will claim the girl is objectifying herself by dressing that way and 'could have expected such responses'. Which, of course, is also complete bullshit.

As for whom you decide to 'accept' compliments from; people can give you a genuine compliment and be a complete jerk about it. Case in point, your friend. The fact that he thinks you're pretty should be a compliment to you. The fact that he then says he'd rape you because of it should make you want to punch him in the face. Doesn't make the original compliment any less genuine, that's just having really (really) bad social skills for the followup of what probably supposed to be flirting (unless you think he's the kind of person who would actually rape you).

Bringing rape into a discussion about sexual objectification doesn't seen over the top at all, rather on point.

It's a marketing statement dressed up to look like feminism in order to sell more clothes/moisturising cream.

You're welcome, my son.



Come on man, you know the Illuminati don't exist. I'm two degrees of seperation from the Elders of Zion!

Finding your body attractive is not insulting. It's what behaviours that can cause that are insulting. Various forms of staring, harassment, soliciting sexual favours and so on, from me everywhere you don't even know. This might not seem bad to you, but to someone who gets this every single time they go out in public, from people physically capable of taking what they want, in a society that sees this as normal and will take steps to punish women who stand against this bullshit, it's intimidating and distressing and not okay. Men who do this will rarely stop when asked, and won't take no for an answer. Only the presence of a man will make them stop, or even the statement "I have a boyfriend" when a simple "no" won't suffice, regardless of whether its true or not. Because even imaginary men get more respect than women.

There's this common line of anti-feminist argument that follows this pattern, and I've actually seen it in some of Thunderf00t's videos (not sure if it's the ones you linked to because I really don't want to sit through that disingenuous bullshit again). That where we see listed several valid issues that are faced specifically by men, and there are plenty of them (not as numerous or generally as bad as those faced by women, but they're still there and need to be fixed). And then instead of discussing them as though they were issues that can and need to be fixed, the context is that we put up with out problems, therefore women should put up with theirs. Literally, recognising real problems, then deliberately ignoring them so that they can be used as ammunition in an argument. This is throwing men under a bus so that they can continue to whale on feminism. It is a tactic used primarily by the slimy veterans of the Men's Rights Activism movement, or MRAs, who are entirely about hating feminism and do nothing to help men. They see any improvement for women as making life worse for men. While privilege is, as Joe said, a zero-sum-game, rights are not. We can work on improving life for men an women at the same time, which is ~99% of humanity right there, and the only time a privileged group will lose out when another group gains equality is when they were unfairly profiting on that inequality (not always knowingly), and I've no problem with that loss at all.

Thunderf00t's videos make me uncomfortable

Like, at times he makes legitimate points but then those points get drowned out by his obvious offense at statements that should warrant no offense, the biases he holds when nitpicking at feminists speeches, and his general... way of presenting his points which is always skewed in is favour without presenting the full context of whatever it is he's criticizing

Are there any videos of him deconstructing any male feminists? I've only seen him going after female feminists and using feminist as a synonym for women

If you honestly believe women and men are treated equally then you have a very warped sense of the world we live in. It's so painfully obvious that sexism is still extremely prominent. The only people who believe that are white straight males who have not had to deal with any form of oppression. I really hate to sound like some Tumblr extremist but anyone I've come across who believes "feminism isn't necessary" have been white straight males. People like that will never understand the plight of someone part of a social minority until they stop being an asshole and learn to face cold hard facts.

It sickens me how the majority of women are represented in media, specifically video games and films. A lot of the time, important female characters are represented in one of two ways: being completely flat and dependent upon men to accomplish anything within the plot; or are vaguely interesting and strong but over-sexualized to fulfill the role of the "hot badass chick". There are crossovers, of course, and some characters that defy these clichés, but these are obviously overshadowed by the cool white dude movies. Anyone who seems to call out this bullshit just gets called an "angry feminist" and their opinion is handwaved.

The thing that pisses me off as much as sexism is people who believe it's not even a thing.

Yeah, because men are portrayed completely realistic in games and movies like, all the time.

And if that upsets you, it makes you a feminist.

Imagine for a second that 90% of men in media were mute, inept little losers who did nothing but stand around and take orders from the nearest woman. You'd probably think that was pretty depressing, right? If you were watching a movie or playing a video game for fun, and the characters representing you were some kind of pathetic shadow of what you actually find admirable? You'd be disappointed or, dare I say, offended.

No-one's asking you to care about decent representation of others on a personal level, but surely you can at least appreciate why people think it's worth complaining about.

The difference in the way men and women are typically portrayed in games, movies and other media is that female characters are sexually objectified to titillate men, while male characters are idealized stereotypes that appeal to the male ego.

The muscly macho men in games and movies aren’t designed for the women in the audience, they’re designed for the men to project themselves on.

Regardless of this, they're still nearly always given the most important role in the plot and are represented as the hero, providing a positive role model for the male demographic. However, female characters are mere shadows of this and rely upon cheap, overused stereotypes to garner attention from (male) fans.

And the solution to this is... to... make a boring every day housewife the lead character with... some boring bald fat guy who lives alone in his basement taking orders from her?

Seriously, I get what you guys are saying but the only solution to this would be to purposefully bore the game/movie down in an effort to make things more realistic.

Games and movies are be definition meant to be works of fiction. Things that won't happen in the real world and that the target audience can identify with and enjoy. Movies and games that are targeted for men will have the fantasies of men in them. Being a badass, riding a tank, saving the hot girl, causing explosions, killing the bad guys and being the hero. People enjoy this stuff, it's meant to entertain, not to set an example for the real world.

Woah, hold on. You're basing this on the male targeted movie/game point of view. Wanna watch a random chick flick and see what happens then?
Suddenly the female is the lead character who is an idealized stereotype that appeals to the female ego. And suddenly we're not talking about unrealistic scenario's aimed at men, but aimed at women instead. The love interest who sheepishly follows them halfway across the world. The passionate and romantic candlelit dinner scenes. The rose peddles leading up to the bed. And let's not forget the amazing love making scene that no guy on the planet will ever be able to live up to. And in the end the girl always gets the beautiful handsome and charming guy who follows her like a puppy. Awwww.

I'm just repeating myself at this point though.

Movies that are targeted at men will have stuff in them that appeals to men.

Movies that are targeted at women will have stuff in them that appeals to women.

Both will portray the opposite sex in the way the target audience likes to see them. Overly sexy and seductive women for men. Overly romantic and charming men for women. Both are equally unrealistic and there's nothing wrong with that. Because it's fiction and meant to entertain, not to educate.

did you literally just reply to the point “women are rarely the lead character in movies” by basically saying “well duh, if the lead were a woman the movie would have to be about housewives and they’d have to make it boring”

did you


Two points:

1. Compare the number of “chick flicks”* made every year to the number of action movies made in a year.
2. Why is there an assumption that media aimed at men and women has to follow different genres? Why can’t action movies star women or be aimed at women?

*And I’m not even gonna go into how the name for this genre is subtly demeaning.


Wrong – works of fiction may be unrealistic but people will still see role models, learn morals, and pick up on social cues and body language. Media plays a role in how we perceive and interact with the world.

Sigh, I can't make a single sarcastic comment around this place without it blowing up in my face.

No, I didn't. I'm just saying that guys want to see a guy as the lead character and not a girl.

It doesn't have to and it doesn't. Just because action movies aimed at women aren't mainstream blockbusters doesn't mean they don't exist. But that demographic isn't huge, simply because women in general don't like action movies as much as men do.

Hollywood isn't very original or taking big risks with their investments as it is. They're not going to produce movies for a target audience which is relatively small compared to the mainstream ones where much more money can be made.

http://linustechtips.com/main/upload...1378350860.jpg

I told you what they were meant to do. Not what people decide to pick up from a work of freakin' fiction. People by the millions actually believe that shooting a car will make it explode into a giant fireball. Or that if you crash you only have a few seconds to escape before it blows up. That doesn't mean Hollywood should change the way things explode on screen because people start think that's how physics work.

If movies were made to be realistic they would be boring as shit and no-one would go to see them. Because you can see said realism by simply walking out of the movie theater. You can see people acting realistic in the real world. And that's not why you go to see a movie.

People are not quantitative values they are people. There is not equality in our society, male-dominance is prominent in many environments - how we should try to overcome this very much a matter of opinion.

[citation needed]

And I'll bet my 1117 DogeCoins that if that is the case, it's primarily because there aren't any made to appeal to them e.g. featuring a female lead.

Nice to see you have no legitimate response.


beep boop all moviegoers are gullible and should just treat movies as i, an unfeeling robot do


hahahahahahahhahahahahahaha

Alright, it sounded like you were saying the meaning of the word equality was subjective, not that the presence of equality in our society was subjective.

I agree. I don't think a genera should be labeled to a gender, regardless if it is targeted to that gender, as it almost makes it seem exclusive.

I don't know if I can really be considered part of the group, but I know that I love superhero movies. I don't really mind or care what the gender of the lead character is, but I do find the "damsel in distress" bit uncomfortable.

I live for the day when we can play a game featuring a chain-smoking, overweight, middle-aged single mother of 6 from a council estate in Middlesbrough.

Simfraud 2000

The government sponsored edutainment for our generation.

Funded and published of course, by a Tory/UKIP coalition.

I'm just not going to get into nitpicking every single little thing that just might be demeaning to women in one way or another. Seriously if the term 'chick flick' is already demeaning I don't see where this is going to ever end.

Didn't you yourself say that moviegoers are gullible, since they take fake social cues from movies that are unrealistic in presenting character relations? Again, how would you fix this? Dumb movies down to realistic (and boring) levels just so people don't walk out of the theater with the wrong social values?

Well now you've found a blog that states that roughly half of moviegoers are female (on a planet with 50% females, what are the odds?) and that females like female lead characters. Shocker.

Now take a more reliable poll and ask women on their own what kind of movies they like (on their own, not with male friends) instead of looking at ticket sales (seriously, how would you even track that with any accuracy?). I'm sure plenty of women like action movies, but I'm also sure that in a poll among 10.000 women, action movies most certainly wouldn't be at the top. Regardless of a male or female lead.

I've actually met more men than women that are into "chick flicks" and just about as many women as men I meet like action flicks

I think humans just like ridiculous over the top explosions and violence. It's a personality thing not a gender/sex thing

I'm just going to stay the fuck right out of this shit.

Oh no you're not get your arse in here and have an opinion you damned fence sitter.

He's not fence sitting. He's leaving the field.

He's a spectator. The kind that only turns up to tell participants that they suck.

That's not what you said, though. You didn't say that women don't like action films as much as other genres, you said they like action films less than men do, and that's why making action films for women isn't profitable. Manco has demonstrated that women make up fully half of the ticket sales for action films, and thereby make up as much of the market as men. You are wrong.

Not sure where or if this fits in.. But in recent music, 'larger' women are being 'empowered' by lyrics explaining that "men like curves, not bone" etc, accompanying the music videos with copious amounts of "twerking", grinding and air humping, which is all a bit bizarre as it doesn't LOOK empowering.. It looks degrading? Sexually suggestive music and music videos make more money than original, well written music that probably deserves more recognition.

I cba to post a link (and possibly corrupt OWF), but take a look at a music video called 'Anaconda' by "Nicki Minaj"... It's literally a song ENTIRELY about fat asses. It samples Sir Mix-a-lot's "baby got back" which is almost exactly the same lyrically. Meh. Or even look at video by a creepy disease ridden creature known as a "Miley Cyrus".. It's all sex sex sex... But it sells. Compare the sales of songs by Artists like these to your favourite Rock/Metal/Punk band, you'll probably feel like crying.

Isn't Nicki Minaj a parody artist like Ke$ha?

That is correct, it's supposed to be ironic.

Ke$ha's a parody? I thought she was just shit.

It's easy how you put label "ironic" / "parody" and now something is wonderful and doesn't suck

I still think that if you were to poll 10.000 men and 10.000 women, action movies would rank higher with the men than with the women, yes. And like I said, ticket sales are hardly trust worthy numbers as to what they actually like, for a variety of reasons.

Also thank you for quoting me out of context in your signature.

I'm pretty sure that's all that matters to film makers.

Anyway, blaming the media is a bit of a cop out. The media represents the values of society, not the other way-around. The reason most action movies have male protagonists is because actiony people in real life tend to be male; complaining about the lack of female leads in action movies is putting the cart before the horse.

It is about empowerment though. They own their own bodies, they take the power of sex away from men.

That's not to say I'm fond of the music, but I get what they're trying to do.

Oh, you think. Well, that's OK then. You can just think quietly in the corner, and come back to the discussion when you have some data.

Besides, you're still missing the point. Your position here is that making action films for women is not commercially viable. If your argument doesn't relate to how much women are actually spending on action films, I don't really see how it's relevant.

Even if you're right, and they routinely go to see films they think they'll hate, we've established that they are going, they still form 50% of the paying market, and therefore targeting them is still viable.

*Looks around*

I don't see any.

Look, you're entitled to your opinion, but if you want to argue about it, you'll have to come up with something a bit more substantial than implying arguments to support your position exist.

You're welcome. It looked even worse in context.

Ke$ha's flat out said everything she did is just making fun of the industry and has proven she's a very capable musician before

That's not to say her work as Ke$ha doesn't suck

Since ticket sales and hard data account for 'hardly trustworthy' evidence to master debater Havoc: Women buy or rent just as much shitty, mindless action garbage as men do. I am telling you this from real life experience. Women are just as stupid and idiotic with what they like as people with penises. They do not trend away from stupid shit for some mysterious reason; men and women are equally fucking stupid. That's the point.

The question isn't whether people enjoy subjective pieces of media. If you start nitpicking which shitty dumb Action movie one person likes or another you're just getting into genre blending.
My sister loves Sin City and Kill Bill but thinks the equally mindless Fast and the Furious movies are stupid wastes of time. So she does like action movies and will go to see them of her own volition. You seem to be buying into the very stereotypes Nepsotic unironically spewed into the OP; 'Even if hard data disagrees, I still think girls don't like BOY movies!' Well, you're wrong.

The problem isn't that depictions like this exist at all, the problem is that it is the industry standard, done practically on autopilot. There's only one model of storytelling being used by games and other media that feature such portrayals, and they are dominant. And it's not like writers are restricted to the paradigm, we can do better, it just requires more thought and effort.

The realism argument is a trap. I've played games where you see women being abused, variously part of the background, story or a side quest where you might intervene, or even watch it happen in all its gruesome detail. Even when it is portrayed as wrong or tragic, both the perpetrator and victim are one dimensional devices that serve the player character as a source of, say, XP and morality points. We don't see the consequences of the incident for either character, once they've served their purpose of establishing atmosphere or providing an unscripted XP boost, they're gone. And the justification for this portrayal? "Realism". Apparently it's one of the few aspects of reality that must make it into such media, but not so realistic as to portray the actual consequences. There are cleverer and less problematic ways to portray and critique abuse, even in games, but such instances are significantly rarer that the shittier portrayals are.

It is also demeaning to the audience to insist that they won't be able to handle or enjoy anything besides or in addition to what they are already getting, or won't be able or willing to identify with a PC of a different gender than themselves. Bringing up the unwillingness of publishers to take so-called "risks" (as though depicting half of the human race as anything more than background decoration, victims and plot devices is risky) is not a way to excuse the issue, it is itself part of that issue and thus something to criticise and fix.

The media influences the values of society, it doesn’t represent. It only represents the opinions of the creators, and there’s plenty of evidence that creators are willing to force their views on society to influence people.


As BM has just said, “it’s like that in real life” is not a sufficient reasoning. It’s a cop-out, an excuse to maintain the status quo. Perhaps “actiony” people do tend to be male in real life, but why does that need to be reflected in fiction? And on a deeper note, why is there that expectation in the first place?