That’s the polar opposite of what he’s saying.
This really is not true, for any reasonable definition of the word “encourage”. I cannot recall any GTA mission that required you to do this. And the cost of prostitutes in game is so low, your character is carrying around literally thousands of dollars at any time, it is hardly worth your time to beat anyone up for 20 or 50 or 100 bucks.
It is more like an Easter egg if anything, and you can beat up any pedestrian to pick up the tiny amount of money they carry, so it’s not any different, just a standard convention in the game for all on foot NPCs.
There is definitely a skewing of the facts to fit the narrative being sold.
2 Likes
OK, I was not aware of the NPC mechanics of GTA. If you can beat up anyone to harvest money, then this is also “skewed” argument as such action can not be strictly considered as sexist unless player only chooses female victims.
The ads for GTA show picking on women specifically, not equal numbers of men and women. The company knows exactly what perks to offer their clientele gamers.
5 Likes
I think it represents escapism and wish fulfilment to a large extent, but the fact that this is such a broad category makes it difficult to nail down why it would be a problem and sexist by definition here, while two-dimensional male characters providing wish fulfilment in erotic or romantic fiction aren’t. If this seems like a ridiculous analogy, remember that nude women in games are not actually nude women, and women’s bodies aren’t actually being offered as prizes - we’re comparing verbal and visual depictions in fiction. I’d say there are a number of potential issues which people should consider (some which are specific to porn, and others which apply to eating meat, buying consumer items, accepting services etc.):
There is the fact that it’s often a real person playing a part and in some cases there could be coercion or abuse involved, but I don’t think that this is necessarily inherent to the genre (or sadly, limited to it). Still, the fact that you could be indirectly participating in and providing a market for abuse should make anyone think carefully about what they’re supporting.
There’s also the fact that women are far more sexually objectified in mainstream culture than men. It’s simpler where it’s porn that someone can view or not view as they choose. When it impacts women’s views of themselves and people’s ideas of what is normative in relationships (sexual or not), this could definitely be a problem. Despite the protests, it seems clear that this is happening to some extent and it’s good that people like Anita Sarkeesian are bringing this question up. Where women in games, advertisements, and other places commonly express sexual availability, it’s not difficult to see how this could lead to problems in real life.
Adult women generally seem to be less attracted to teenage boys than adult men are to teenage girls, so there is much more scope for abuse and coercion there (even when we’re talking about women who are 18 and over). While both men and women seem to have weird attractions to taboo subjects in their porn, men aren’t as likely to be harmed by women’s weird fetishes in real life.
As you say, a big problem is that porn is both highly popular and taboo. I don’t see why either needs to be the case though. I have met a number of sex workers and people who have modelled nude - I don’t find them disgusting, tainted or anything like that. Many are a lot more intelligent than you might think - one guy I met got tired of his engineering job and wanted to travel the world for a few years before returning, so he did. Where I saw women who were desperate and fit the typical stereotype of a prostitute, it was clear that there was a lot more going on than sex. There are places where sex work is less stigmatised, which seems to help. I think one analogy to the issue would be being a housewife. There’s nothing wrong with a woman staying at home with kids and it can be fulfilling in certain contexts, but where women are given few other options and are disrespected for being a housewife, that is a problem.
These are big factors and shouldn’t be ignored. However, there seem to be a lot of sex workers out there who reject the idea that sex or sexual images should not be for sale, or that they have little agency in the matter. I think sexual fantasy is pretty normal, but we should be aware of how it affects real people and our impression of them.
Am I the only person who thinks these “women” are completely unappealing? I know I’m a lady, but I’d get more excited at a Barbie doll in a bikini than these weird automatons. What’s up with this? Are people really into the pervy blow-up doll look? Even the supposedly-based-on-real-women Penthouse people look like ugly robots.
I thought graphics in video games had advanced beyond this point. For example, don’t men want boobs that look like they actually jiggle instead of looking like a ham stuck on her front?
What is going on here???
5 Likes
And then they feel disappointed when real women don’t look like that.
1 Like
Yes, you absolutely can. Here’s how you rob a gun shop:
Here’s how you rob a convenience store:
Part of the appeal of the GTA games from the start was that you could cause mayhem and do things that you couldn’t do in real life. It’s a sandbox game with a seedy ambience, so you do have prostitutes who you can pick up. You can also kill them, because they follow the same rules as everyone else. People are going to talk about the taboo parts and may well try them, but that doesn’t mean that killing a prostitute is even encouraged to the same extent as killing anyone else.
It’s pretty bizarre. Apparently there’s a market for it, but I’ve never found that kind of thing attractive. Half of the Penthouse-style models seem to be in the uncanny valley anyway though, so I guess it may be a fairly accurate representation.
2 Likes
THIS.
And people do it. Sure, you don’t have to do it, its not an integral part of the game play, but we really should look at the why. Why was it included. Thats the whole point of critique.
EXACTLY! 
7 Likes
You are much more encouraged to kill cops, bystanders and drivers. Why is that less problematic? It’s a game that attracts people who don’t want to be limited by rules like they had in other games before (e.g. you can drive at pedestrians, but they always jump out of the way just in time), and does allow you to kill innocent people such as drivers who probably have families, police officers who are trying to stop you from committing mayhem and prostitutes. I’m not defending this game and I don’t play it, it just seems odd to point out attacking one demographic as problematic when that’s how the whole game works. Removing prostitutes might make it less problematic, but I’d say being able to have sex was initially the shocking part, not the fact that you could kill people you had sex with.
Fine, and those are good things to discuss. As I have said, I don’t think games occupy some neutral zone where no ethical considerations apply. Killing hookers actually doesn’t come that high in the problematic elements of GTA V, but it is also the least justified accusation of sexism as getting health for killing a prostitute works in the same way as other characters. It is a sexist game despite the amazing parts, and this is covered well by Carolyn Petit’s review:
There’s so much more to say about GTA V. In series tradition, it has an eclectic assortment of radio stations featuring great songs from numerous genres and eras. In a break with series tradition, it also has an excellent ambient score of its own that lends missions more cinematic flavor. On a less positive note, it’s deeply frustrating that, while its central and supporting male characters are flawed and complex characters, with a few extremely minor exceptions (such as the aforementioned optional getaway driver), GTA V has little room for women except to portray them as strippers, prostitutes, long-suffering wives, humorless girlfriends and goofy, new-age feminists we’re meant to laugh at.
Characters constantly spout lines that glorify male sexuality while demeaning women, and the billboards and radio stations of the world reinforce this misogyny, with ads that equate manhood with sleek sports cars while encouraging women to purchase a fragrance that will make them “smell like a bitch.” Yes, these are exaggerations of misogynistic undercurrents in our own society, but not satirical ones. With nothing in the narrative to underscore how insane and wrong this is, all the game does is reinforce and celebrate sexism. The beauty of cruising in the sun-kissed Los Santos hills while listening to “Higher Love” by Steve Winwood turns sour really quick when a voice comes on the radio that talks about using a woman as a urinal.
It’s a shame that this is one of the many examples of thin-skinned men who tried to get Petit fired for docking one star out of ten for misogyny.
Bingo.
3 Likes
That would make me laugh the hardest. Can I propose a name? Ministry of Equality
7 Likes
To be fair, Sarkeesian has gotten better, but this is one of the points where I think she over-egged the pudding by making the connection between “you can sleep with prostitutes, who interact with you as NPCs rather than cutscenes” and “you can kill any NPC” as “GTA supports sexual violence”. It isn’t a huge deal as there are plenty of other examples of misogyny in that game, but that conclusion isn’t valid. Different characters interact with you in different ways, and you could do whatever that thing is before killing them. Taxi drivers and convenience store owners are other groups that are at risk of violence in real life - you can take a ride in a taxi before killing the driver or go to a convenience store before killing the shopkeeper. In fact, you can take a ride in a taxi and hijack it with a specific button, so that’s something that was built in. The game doesn’t stop you from killing a person until a set time after you slept with them, because that’s not the way it works. The negative depiction of prostitutes and women in general is a more valid argument, because that’s not just a result of a sandbox style game.
Which GTA are you talking about? I thought it was about killing Hare Krishnas? Prostitutes have only been in the game since GTA III, but a number of controversial elements are older and the makers have used controversy from the start to increase sales.
People should be able to talk about what is and isn’t sexist. I thought Petit’s article was good and provided a reasoned review which incorporated the problematic parts within the context of the game, and made it clear that she understood its mechanics. The parts she critiqued were consciously added parts to the game, rather than universal gameplay elements (e.g. you can kill prostitutes, bodies disappear after a certain time, some NPCs are repeated throughout the map, there are different missions where you can choose to respond or not and some will involve protecting NPCs). It does matter if a game is going to be triggering for women because they can’t play it without seeing or having to commit acts of sexual violence. Where people argue that no violence should be possible at all in a certain context, it looks like you’d be better off playing a different kind of game. Where an option is available that doesn’t have to affect any other player, like choosing to buy a particular item (such as the Penthouse characters), I’d say a bigger consideration is whether there are plenty of other options and whether a female player would be discouraged from playing because this option exists.
I don’t think she’s either and I do think her videos are improving, but this is an issue that comes up in a few of her videos. Games aren’t real life, and the fact that someone chooses to do something shocking in a game doesn’t mean that they would do it or approve of it in real life. If that were not true, we’d hardly have any non-sports games left.
Not at all, and I hope I’m not sounding dense or as if I’m dismissing these issues.
1 Like
dude cant belev thay would do that
I’d argue that the <strike> text should be reversed – they’re not offering this to big-G gamers, they’re offering this to their clientele. As we (big-W, whatever the hell I mean) are slowly learning is that the cliched market of gamers is not the market of gamers.
She did bring those issues up, but she doesn’t show the knowledge of the game in her video that Petit does in her review. Both criticise the misogyny of a game that does involve misogyny and needs to involve women more, but Petit’s criticism is more on point. The humour in these games is supposed to be over the top and poking fun at modern sensibilities, but it isn’t fair if women become the butt of the jokes and there’s an uncritical acceptance of prejudice.
There has always been moral panic about this game since it was top-down and 2D, and it has often been based on rumours rather than experience (initially it was often concern by people like the police that this would lead to glamorisation of lawbreaking and violence). I would make a distinction between a person who would like to play a game like this but is discouraged by negative portrayals of women or other issues (or who want other games to be available that are more suited to their interests), and those who want to see games like these banned. I want to encourage the first and I think companies like Rockstar should listen, but I’m less enthusiastic about the second. I think Anita is somewhere between both camps.
If you can play the whole game without coming into contact with these elements (and without having to consciously avoid them, either) and without being affected by other people’s ways of playing an open game, I don’t think the fact that something is technically possible should be such a big concern. On the other hand, prostitutes are an element that is used to build up your health. Are you disadvantaged if you don’t approve of that element and only want to use other ways? You can kill a prostitute and get your money back (you will get heat for this action). Does this change the gameplay enough that killing the prostitute is worth the heat, and not killing the prostitute will leave you short of money? You can pay for Penthouse pets to populate your city in Saint’s Row. Does this affect the multiplayer version of the game? Is the default game sexualised too? Are only women sexualised? How much representation of women is there, and what is the quality of it? Do the ads feature this option as a draw for the game, or is it just one of many options you can find on your own? (ETA: and yes, a lot of the answers to these questions are both obvious and problematic, but I’d want to focus on those rather than condemning sexualised imagery and the possibility of violence against prostitutes just because they exist. Games like GTA are clearly written specifically for men without much thought for women’s experiences, as Sam Houser himself admitted*, and that needs to change). As I said, I personally don’t play GTA and I find the whole Penthouse style weird. However, I’d like more evidence of harm before agreeing that these elements should not be there at all.
*When I asked Mr. Houser if he had thought about the portrayal of women in Rockstar’s games, he said, “Seemingly not as much as I should have.” He added: “These three guys fit with the story we wanted to tell. It would be hard to take one of them and replace him — I mean, I suppose we could have done it, early enough on — with a female character.”
1 Like
The strikeout was to draw attention to the use of the word “clientele”, which is normally used in a different line of work, if you know what I mean. 
1 Like
“Boob physics” is an actual video game thing, which is sometimes crowed about in marketing resources (mostly for hairy-handed crap like Dead or Alive, but other games as well).
On the one hand yes, it does make things more realistic (provided the programmers don’t go for maximum wank capabilities) but on the other hand, they are bragging about having boob physics.
Sadly, a game with hyped up cock physics has yet to hit the market.
7 Likes
7 Likes
