The only point I can possibly make based on my knowledge is that there's no excuse for a Japanese person who has gone to school for any length of time to not know English. It's being offered to them, possibly much earlier than I last read about.Originally Posted by Mirage
Dear Sirs,
I am writing to object in the strongest possible terms to the idea of a female mechanic wearing such provocative clothing. I myself have worked as a mechanic for quite a number of years now and the females who choose this profession are governed by the same laws of physics as any other mechanic, requiring copious amounts of protective clothing under the law of my country of residence.
I am no longer willing to financially support a producer of interactive entertainment that is willing to put forth such tripe and call it a AAA release.
Sincere thanks for your time and consideration,
Spooniest
Last edited by Spooniest; 01-10-2015 at 02:39 AM.
I don't think it matters which headquarters you send it to. They're all under the same banner anyway. I went ahead and sent mine to the NA corporate headquarters. Whichever one is closest to you should work.
As a tip, hand-written letters are considerably more likely to reach their destination. If you hand-write your letter and send it to the producer, there's every possibility it will indeed reach the producer or the producer's PA. I've seen instances of SE responding to hand-written letters before, notably the producer/director of FFXIV who made an open letter as a reply to one of them during FFXIV 1.x. Can't remember if it was Yoshi-P or the other guy.
Bow before the mighty Javoo!
For what it's worth...
https://angelwitchpaganheart.wordpre...-off-my-chest/
Repeatedly in her article she mentions about how she wants more body types represented. Earlier in her article she writes that women's sizes have increased to a number of things, obesity being one of them. I cannot understand how she in good conscience can tout, "We want more body types!" while ignoring the fact that a multitude of body types are in fact not being represented, and that instead there is a specific body characteristic being represented here with female characters sporting large breasts. I do not see her advocating for more body types. I see her advocating for female characters to keep their large breasts.It is my opinion that assuming that big breasted characters are incapable of having any personality and reducing them to ‘smurf toys’ is, in itself, sexist and demeaning. It assumes that breast size and sexiness are the only things that the player notices or cares about in regard to female characters. Even worse is the assumption that this will make gamers sexist towards women in real life, a presumption that I find deeply patronising and insulting as a gamer. This morality policing of gaming has gotten out of hand. The vast majority of gamers are adults, let us decide for ourselves what we find acceptable. If more body types in gaming is what you want then stick to that instead of yet again promoting one kind of woman at the expense of another. Busty women are gamers too, some of us want to continue to see characters that look like us, deal with it.
And this little gem:
Her mentality does not promote more body types. It promotes one kind of woman who is typecast among a majority of video games featuring breasts too large for their proportions, aka the Sex Toy model from below. If this writer was in favor of more varied body types, she should be promoting body types like these, most of which are more realistic and less fetishized:If more body types in gaming is what you want then stick to that instead of yet again promoting one kind of woman at the expense of another.
It is offensive to me that she can blurt out this sentence on a blog titled "Thoughts of a Feminist Gamer". No.Even worse is the assumption that this will make gamers sexist towards women in real life, a presumption that I find deeply patronising and insulting as a gamer.
Last edited by Shorty; 01-14-2015 at 04:58 PM.
Anyone who thinks that more body types means "fat girls" and "flat girls"... just... what. Sarah's list is just a sampling of how many body types there are for girls out there. Almost all of those are still emphasised hourglass figures, while most women I know don't match that, particularly athletic ones. People just need to look up "family portrait" on image search. So many types.
I can agree with a general sentiment that "omg this girl has a pinup body type that is so sexist" or "omg this girl has big boobs that is so sexist" can be bad to an extent in that such girls do exist and we shouldn't attack developers or call them "unrealistic" just for appearing in video games. However, they should appear alongside other females of all kinds of body types. Guys, too. Some games are pretty good at this, however a lot of them are not.
Ideally, unless a character is in a role where fitness is relevant, characters should be reasonably well represented across the spectrum, and I think everyone here can agree that doesn't happen.
Bow before the mighty Javoo!
Omg at the Kate Mossthat's terrible
Why is that offensive? You think people don't know the difference between the real world and a video game?
I guess I feel that FF's don't need to give "reasonable" representations of people. I haven't seen many fat, old, or bald male protagonists and I'm not bothered by that. Many of the characters in FF have idealized figures, male and female, which i'm fine with. I believe games are the appropriate medium for these things, Final Fantasy in particular.
Final Fantasy is not some magazine with photoshopped images of "real" women that give girls false or misleading expectations of what a womans figure should be(which is a pretty horrible thing) . People are aware that games are just games. I haven't seen any evidence that VG's change people's behavior to real word people.
Some people know the difference between real world and a video game. Some people are aware that games are just games.Why is that offensive? You think people don't know the difference between the real world and a video game?
I guess I feel that FF's don't need to give "reasonable" representations of people. I haven't seen many fat, old, or bald male protagonists and I'm not bothered by that. Many of the characters in FF have idealized figures, male and female, which i'm fine with. I believe games are the appropriate medium for these things, Final Fantasy in particular.
Final Fantasy is not some magazine with photoshopped images of "real" women that give girls false or misleading expectations of what a womans figure should be(which is a pretty horrible thing) . People are aware that games are just games. I haven't seen any evidence that VG's change people's behavior to real word people.
However, I believe that the nastiness of GG spreading through the internet like wildfire is a product of men believing that women are objects to be used and abused as they so desire, which is what the female character stereotypes reinforce when their visuals represented in order to appeal to men's tastes and fantasies.
This behavior is not limited to the internet. Additionally, is represented just the same with photoshopped women in magazines, surgically-altered women in porn and so on vs. The Real Female Population.
Okay, let's use the well-worn example of Anita Sarkeesian.I haven't seen any evidence that VG's change people's behavior to real word people.
Anita begins a blog called Tropes vs. Women in Video Games, which examined tropes that she believes reinforce damaging stereotypes about women. Essentially, this is a movement to break away from the female character stereotypes that we all know too well.
She is attacked because of this. She is attacked because men want those female characters to remain the same; they want their games to remain untouched. She becomes a victim of death and rape threats, her webpages and social media are hacked, her article on Wikipedia is vandalized, among a slew of slander and additional threats of all sorts online in comments and Twitter and the like. One attacker created a computer game that allowed players to beat and bloody an image of her. She was forced to vacate her home due to the threats she received, and just recently had to abandon a conference at the University of Utah due to threats of gun violence.
All of these behaviors are examples of peoples' real life behaviors. They are behaviors caused by video games.
This is one case among many where females are harassed, threatened, and whose lives are otherwise endangered because they seek to change the female body, character and role stereotypes in games.
So for you to say "I haven't seen any evidence that VG's change people's behavior to real word people", I have to ask, are you paying attention?
Last edited by Shorty; 01-15-2015 at 12:54 AM.
First, the vast majority of people know the difference between VG's and reality, not just "some". Give our species a lil more credit than that plz.
Those folks who attack Anita do not represent all men, not even close.I believe that the nastiness of GG spreading through the internet like wildfire is a product of men believing that women are objects to be used and abused as they so desire
Conjecture, at best. You can't possibly say that they only able to do so because they played video games... Video Games are not responsible for those individuals behavior. GTA V has sold 35 million copies but hasnt change they way ppl function in the real word, to the best of my knowledge(and multiple article's chronicling the decrease of all forms of violence over the past 20 yrs in correlation to increased gaming.) Here's an interesting aticle about how "bad" vg behavior may change us tho.They are behaviors caused by video games
If they weren't hacking her, they were gonna be hacking someone else. Their criminals, thats all. They don't represent an entire gender.
Now, back to FF. Why is it wrong for Cidney to be visually appealing to men? Many of the men is this game have idealized figures, and are appealing to women. Thats doesn't automatically make them a "sexualized trope". Frankly tho, I believe sexualizing characters is a normal thing humans do. I also don't believe women are "damaged" by these characters either. I give the female gender the credit deserved. Most women are very capable of seeing a game for what it is.
You're getting awfully defensive for something that I never implied. Nowhere in my responses have I said, "All men do this! The vast majority of men are sexist pigs who seek to sexually abuse and objectify women! All men want to beat and bloody Anita!" Nowhere have I said those things, so I am not sure why you are confusing me referring to GG as representing the entirety of men.
I am aware that not all men are like this. It is you who are not giving my argument credit. I stated facts. Men do this. Men are doing this. Men create stereotyped female characters which negatively affect women in "the real world". Those are facts.
Hey look, I can find links to support my argument as well.
Racism and sexism in the gaming world: Reinforcing or changing stereotypes in computer games?
SeX-Box: Exposure to Sexist Video Games Predicts Benevolent SexismIn general, we expect to find that computer games are designed and marketed for white, adolescent males, with evidence of both color-blind racism and overt sexism in the advertisements. Since the mid to late-1980s, many social programs in the U.S. have been retracted or eliminated altogether. This trend—often described as the dismantling of the Great Society programs which were implemented to minimize racial and gender inequality— has slowed efforts toward racial and gender equality (Marable, 2000; Sampson and Laub, 1993). Given this trend, we hypothesize:
(4) Current computer game advertisements (from 2009) will be as racially and gender biased (or more) than those from two decades ago.
and here
Some good arguments here for how video games do affect their players and their players' behaviors.We examined the association between playing sexist video games and sexist attitudes. Undergraduate students (61 men and 114 women) indicated the level of perceived sexism present in their most frequently played video games. Students also completed the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (Glick & Fiske, 1996), which measures both hostile and benevolent sexism. As predicted, men who played video games perceived to be high in sexism showed higher levels of benevolent sexism, compared with men who did not play such games. This relationship was not evident for women. Importantly, our study provides the first known evidence of a link between long-term exposure to sexist video games and sexist attitudes. Although correlational, these data are consistent with the notion that sexist video games encourage and reinforce sexist attitudes. Our findings have important real-world implications for video game researchers, parents, and game players themselves.
Games inspire physical responses, they inspire emotions from us, they can change the way we think or act or provide a new perspective. They have the capacity to do all of the things people mimic after watching a television show or film or reading a book, even to change lives.
This may not translate to people going on murdering rampages in the street. That's not what I'm suggesting. I'm not suggesting that people become full-blown sexists and women-haters because busty character appears on screen. What these things do, though is inspire benevolent sexism, as the articles linked above says. To say that games don't cause, ignite, or otherwise inspire behaviors is, quite frankly, a bunch of bulltrout.
Asking why it's not okay for Cidney to be visually appealing for men followed by saying that sexualizing people is normal and then to say that you give the female gender the credit they deserve is preposterous, because evidently, you do not. You are giving the female gender the credit you think we deserve, which does not translate to credit at all.
Last edited by Shorty; 01-15-2015 at 12:58 AM.
...Yeah, I'm just going to cover a few basic things here.
Firstly, just a general response to what you say on her article.
The point of the article wasn't to actively promote other Body Types in gaming. The point was to speak out against people who are constantly bashing games because of characters with big boobs. At no point does she say that other types are not welcome, she is simply countering people who keep saying that the big boobs are not welcome. (Yeah, in this very thread we have someone saying they are going to write a letter to square showing their disapproval of Cid's attire, and no one is saying this is a bad thing. So yeah, there are people saying the boobs aren't welcome, and none of you are exactly saying you disagree with that.)
No. Firstly, I'm going to ignore Troll's for purpose of this repsonse. (Yeah, the trolls are smurfing troutty, but everyone with any semblance of clout on the internet gets those in droves.) People dislike Anita because of how nonsensical her statements are. You need only look at her dissection of hit man to realize this. The game penalizes you for killing innocents (You know, like all those strippers you see being killed in the video she that she claims the game in question encourages you to kill) to see how, at best, disingenuous she is being in her critique.Anita begins a blog called Tropes vs. Women in Video Games, which examined tropes that she believes reinforce damaging stereotypes about women. Essentially, this is a movement to break away from the female character stereotypes that we all know too well.
She is attacked because of this.
I hope you have some way to back this claim up.She is attacked because men want those female characters to remain the same; they want their games to remain untouched.
Oh, you mean like what happened to Christina Hoff Sommers after she said a lot of these people criticizing Video games in the manner they were rather off base? (Protip: it wasn't people who support GG that went after her.) Or when she speaks out against blatantly false statistics? (Yeah, take a wild guess over where are the vitriol towards her comes from) Or how about Jack Thompson, who received pretty much the exact same treatment as Anita did, in his case the beat up image game as well? Guess that last one kind of destroys this being a thing only women have to deal with. (Yes, death and vivid threats of anal rape were all sent to Jack Thompson.)She becomes a victim of death and rape threats, her webpages and social media are hacked, her article on Wikipedia is vandalized, among a slew of slander and additional threats of all sorts online in comments and Twitter and the like. One attacker created a computer game that allowed players to beat and bloody an image of her
I'll give you the former, cause that's just plain troutty. Note though, it takes ONE person to do this. But the latter is quite frankly silly. Unless you believe the official reports were full of trout, both state and federal investigations showed the threats to have no credibility what so ever. Regardless, Campus Security was still set to be increased during the event. There is a discrepancy between them saying they were in contact with Anita the whole time, and Anita saying she learned only once she arrived, but point in case this looked as if it were little more then some jack ass high schooler calling in a fake bomb threat to get school canceled for a day. Threats like this happen all the time. Hell, they've happened to Marilyn Manson multiple times from people trying to get his shows canceled cause they felt he was to edgy.She was forced to vacate her home due to the threats she received, and just recently had to abandon a conference at the University of Utah due to threats of gun violence.
You have exactly as much backing you up as Jack Thompson's claims do.All of these behaviors are examples of peoples' real life behaviors. They are behaviors caused by video games.
And no, pointing out that 'gamers did the same thing to Jack Thomspon' doesn't prove you're right, just as me pointing out all the absolutely terrible things some ass holes have done in the name of Feminism wouldn't be proof that Feminism caused all of this rotten behavior. Absolutely every horrible, troutty thing that has happened can be ascribed to a small handful of individuals easily.
I'm not saying she said other body types are not welcome. The leg she uses to stand on about why we should keep large-breasted characters is "to include more body types". She says this several times in her article, yet it does not accurately reflect her argument because she is concerned about disproportionately-designed female characters to keep their large breasts, not to be more inclusive of realistic body types that result in the large breasts mentioned.
She is attacked because she wishes to change the way women are misogynistically portrayed in video games by those who disagree with her and those who do not want to include measures that support feminist ideals in their games. My statement is correct.No. Firstly, I'm going to ignore Troll's for purpose of this repsonse. (Yeah, the trolls are smurfing troutty, but everyone with any semblance of clout on the internet gets those in droves.) People dislike Anita because of how nonsensical her statements are. You need only look at her dissection of hit man to realize this. The game penalizes you for killing innocents (You know, like all those strippers you see being killed in the video she that she claims the game in question encourages you to kill) to see how, at best, disingenuous she is being in her critique.Anita begins a blog called Tropes vs. Women in Video Games, which examined tropes that she believes reinforce damaging stereotypes about women. Essentially, this is a movement to break away from the female character stereotypes that we all know too well.
She is attacked because of this.
Sure. Read all you like. People making threats because the women seeking to change the movement translates to gamers wanting their games to be untouched by feminist ideals like the one Anita promotes. This means she is attacked because people want those female characters to remain the same.I hope you have some way to back this claim up.She is attacked because men want those female characters to remain the same; they want their games to remain untouched.
Sorry, but that's a bunch of bulltrout. Someone says that they are going to shoot up a school if a certain individual speaks there, and you want to say that such a threat wasn't credible? Where do you stand as an authority on whether or not a shooting threat should be taken seriously or not? Furthermore, campus security means nothing when a shooting threat has been made and campus authorities say that they will continue to allow guns on campus and in the auditorium. It means nothing.I'll give you the former, cause that's just plain troutty. Note though, it takes ONE person to do this. But the latter is quite frankly silly. Unless you believe the official reports were full of trout, both state and federal investigations showed the threats to have no credibility what so ever. Regardless, Campus Security was still set to be increased during the event. There is a discrepancy between them saying they were in contact with Anita the whole time, and Anita saying she learned only once she arrived, but point in case this looked as if it were little more then some jack ass high schooler calling in a fake bomb threat to get school canceled for a day. Threats like this happen all the time. Hell, they've happened to Marilyn Manson multiple times from people trying to get his shows canceled cause they felt he was to edgy.She was forced to vacate her home due to the threats she received, and just recently had to abandon a conference at the University of Utah due to threats of gun violence.
Does it matter if ONE person or if thousands sent her threats of rape and violence to her home? So smurfing what if it was one person? I hardly believe it would be one in any case because thousands of people did it, but it shouldn't matter if it was one or a thousand; what matters is that it happened. It's really quite offensive that you shake that off in an, "oh, a rape/murder threat from one person isn't a big deal" sort of tone. Why was that important to note at all?
Last edited by Shorty; 01-14-2015 at 11:49 PM.
I fail to see how disapproving of the outfit equates to shaming big breasted women. If her bra size was smaller and she was still dressed like that I would feel exactly the same way as I do now. It feels like we're talking about two separate things here. And multiple people have already said her exposed breasts isn't the only issue they have with the outfit.
Posting Permissions
