- Joined
- Aug 7, 2014
I hope you change your mind, I need to know in what way Sheik is sexualized. I've never heard that claim before.
Sexual Objectification in Smash Bros 4
- Thread starter Ver-go-a-go-go
- Start date
I hope you change your mind, I need to know in what way Sheik is sexualized. I've never heard that claim before.
Garo
Boy Wonder
To add a dissenting voice to this dull roar...
It is important to note that the men in these games are not being sexualized but rather idealized. Their attributes are exaggerated in a way that heightens and showcases masculine traits generally seen as ideal for men by other men. Physical strength is perhaps the predominant societal measure of a man's masculinity. So these characters that are always shown rippling with absurdly defined musculature and in poses that specifically highlight that are not being displayed in a manner that is expressly sexual (though it is certainly something that is somewhat commonly considered sexually attractive), but rather in a manner in keeping with traditional male definitions of male worth. To put it more succinctly: the male characters are idealized with regard to the male power fantasy, rather than with regard to female sexual preference.
This is okay!
It is perfectly okay to depict characters through a lens that amplifies their gender identity. Male characters exhibiting traits generally considered ideal for males is totally fine! People want to play as an idealized character a lot of the time, and in a game devoted to bashing the heads of your opponents in, it makes total sense.
The female characters, however, are frequently displayed in positions that are not physically possible for the human body to contort into, and displayed in these positions to highlight physical traits that are generally considered sexually attractive by a predominantly male demographic. Their agility and flexibility is highlighted, which - while certainly traits conducive to the context of the game - are equally considered sexually attractive quite commonly.
This is less okay!
When you're depicting male characters through a lens that reflects the desires of men (i.e. depicting male characters with traits that men wish they had), you are providing a sense of escapism through the power fantasy. But when you're depicting female characters through a lens that reflects the desires of men, then you're completely shutting out an entire audience who want characters that they can escape through, characters who display traits that they find ideal. In doing this, you're creating an environment where women gamers are being told that their "ideal" traits are those considered sexually attractive to men, as if that is the ultimate aspiration of a woman. That is a problem.
Is this depiction misogynist? Well, that's not really something I feel qualified to weigh in on. I'm not as well versed in the subject as others, however my intuition has me leaning toward the depiction being tacitly misogynist in the sense that it plays right into the endemic misogyny of society (after all, this depiction is, in the end, pretty good marketing, even if it's a bit gross), rather than being actively misogynist in the sense that somebody harbors a hatred for women and is depicting them in such a way to actively degrade them.
So yes, I have issues with the depiction of characters like Zero Suit Samus in the game. I do not have issues with things like Pajama Shulk, because it doesn't take a female character and present them only through the lens of male desire. It actually does quite a bit to curb the heavy male power fantasy depiction of traditional male characters, and in that respect could be seen as a positive thing rather than just a harmless neutral thing.
Are these issues something that I am going to openly complain about at every chance? No. Are these issues that I'm going to overlook? Also no. Are these issues enough to keep me from buying a game that I know I will enjoy? To this degree, no. Smash Brothers is not extreme enough in its poor depiction of characters to warrant anything like a boycott. It warrants a "hey, Nintendo, that's not cool" at most.
So: Hey, Nintendo, that's not cool.
It is important to note that the men in these games are not being sexualized but rather idealized. Their attributes are exaggerated in a way that heightens and showcases masculine traits generally seen as ideal for men by other men. Physical strength is perhaps the predominant societal measure of a man's masculinity. So these characters that are always shown rippling with absurdly defined musculature and in poses that specifically highlight that are not being displayed in a manner that is expressly sexual (though it is certainly something that is somewhat commonly considered sexually attractive), but rather in a manner in keeping with traditional male definitions of male worth. To put it more succinctly: the male characters are idealized with regard to the male power fantasy, rather than with regard to female sexual preference.
This is okay!
It is perfectly okay to depict characters through a lens that amplifies their gender identity. Male characters exhibiting traits generally considered ideal for males is totally fine! People want to play as an idealized character a lot of the time, and in a game devoted to bashing the heads of your opponents in, it makes total sense.
The female characters, however, are frequently displayed in positions that are not physically possible for the human body to contort into, and displayed in these positions to highlight physical traits that are generally considered sexually attractive by a predominantly male demographic. Their agility and flexibility is highlighted, which - while certainly traits conducive to the context of the game - are equally considered sexually attractive quite commonly.
This is less okay!
When you're depicting male characters through a lens that reflects the desires of men (i.e. depicting male characters with traits that men wish they had), you are providing a sense of escapism through the power fantasy. But when you're depicting female characters through a lens that reflects the desires of men, then you're completely shutting out an entire audience who want characters that they can escape through, characters who display traits that they find ideal. In doing this, you're creating an environment where women gamers are being told that their "ideal" traits are those considered sexually attractive to men, as if that is the ultimate aspiration of a woman. That is a problem.
Is this depiction misogynist? Well, that's not really something I feel qualified to weigh in on. I'm not as well versed in the subject as others, however my intuition has me leaning toward the depiction being tacitly misogynist in the sense that it plays right into the endemic misogyny of society (after all, this depiction is, in the end, pretty good marketing, even if it's a bit gross), rather than being actively misogynist in the sense that somebody harbors a hatred for women and is depicting them in such a way to actively degrade them.
So yes, I have issues with the depiction of characters like Zero Suit Samus in the game. I do not have issues with things like Pajama Shulk, because it doesn't take a female character and present them only through the lens of male desire. It actually does quite a bit to curb the heavy male power fantasy depiction of traditional male characters, and in that respect could be seen as a positive thing rather than just a harmless neutral thing.
Are these issues something that I am going to openly complain about at every chance? No. Are these issues that I'm going to overlook? Also no. Are these issues enough to keep me from buying a game that I know I will enjoy? To this degree, no. Smash Brothers is not extreme enough in its poor depiction of characters to warrant anything like a boycott. It warrants a "hey, Nintendo, that's not cool" at most.
So: Hey, Nintendo, that's not cool.
JuicieJ
SHOW ME YA MOVES!
Garo, it's called tasteful fan service. Nothing you don't see in real life basically every day is on display, and it's certainly nowhere near the level of a lot of other games in the Fighting genre (Ivy, anyone?). Bringing up the impossible contortions is also irrelevant because this is a Fighter, i.e. a game where impossible things happen with nearly every motion. In the case of Zero Suit Samus, it's showing off split-second animations to display how agile she is so that we can get the idea of how she's going to function even without viewing gameplay footage.
I'm not going to deny that female sexualization is a problem in the gaming industry, but I can guarantee you it's not an issue in Smash. We're talking about a game like this:
Not like this:
I'm not going to deny that female sexualization is a problem in the gaming industry, but I can guarantee you it's not an issue in Smash. We're talking about a game like this:
Not like this:
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2014
I wouldn't call all of it especially tasteful. I do agree with you that the contortions are not part of the problem.Garo, it's called tasteful fan service. Nothing you don't see in real life basically every day is on display, and it's certainly nowhere near the level of a lot of other games in the Fighting genre (Ivy, anyone?). Bringing up the impossible contortions is also irrelevant because this is a Fighter, i.e. a game where impossible things happen with nearly every motion. In the case of Zero Suit Samus, it's showing off split-second animations to display how agile she is so that we can get the idea of how she's going to function even without viewing gameplay footage.
I'm not going to deny that female sexualization is a problem in the gaming industry, but I can guarantee you it's not an issue in Smash. We're talking about a game like this:
Not like this:
I also agree that Smash is pretty tame when it comes to sexuality, as I said earlier in the thread, but there's a trend going on when you compare Samus' proportions from Brawl to SSB4, and it shouldn't be ignored. No franchise or company should be considered immune to these problems.
Garo
Boy Wonder
Agreed. Additionally, even if it is tasteful (and honestly I don't consider any of the Smash designs "tasteless," just perhaps not in the best taste), we must consider which fans are being serviced. Hint: it's not the ones whose representation is being stripped down.
Contortion is not a problem; impossible contortion, in and of itself, isn't a problem either. The problem is when it's being employed specifically to display sexual traits. The recent Spider-Woman cover controversy, for instance, is an example of why it's a bad thing. While, again, Smash is pretty tame about it, it's a trend and something that should be called out and noted where it occurs.
Standing by as the lines of acceptability are blurred repeatedly is what allows this stuff to infest the industry as much as it has.
I want to highlight this again:
This cannot be emphasized enough. This is a problem with the industry as a whole, and it needs to be kept at bay on all fronts. Waiting until it's a major problem on the level of something like Dead or Alive Extreme Volleyball (which honestly I could easily make an argument for being less insidious than Smash because it's so overt as to wear its clear indulgent, male-focused marketing on its sleeve rather than dressing it up in family friendly trappings) isn't going to get the industry anywhere, and will forever relegate us to stigmatized status.
We've got to grow up as an industry before the world will give us a seat at the adult's table.
JuicieJ
SHOW ME YA MOVES!
Her Smash 4 model is based on her Other M model, which was altered from the one Retro used in Metroid Prime 3 (the one used for Brawl) -- and reasonably so, since different creative minds were behind the two games. I fail to see how having Samus having an attractive figure is a problem when she's clearly not objectified by the design. I guarantee you the reason people are objecting to this is because it's an issue in the world -- not just gaming, outside in real life -- so people naturally knee-jerk react and jump on the bandwagon, which I find to be rather petty. If it weren't a hot topic, this wouldn't be a discussion.
Considering Shulk's alt, I'd say it's unquestionably both male & female fan service that's going on.
Again, that's not what's going on in Smash images, especially with Zero Suit Samus. It's displaying how agile she is by showing stills of her acrobatic animations since it can't display them in footage. Go look at her footage from the Direct and you'll see that when she's standing still, she's always in an upright position. Why? Because it didn't need to show stills of her, as her attacks were capable of being on full display. This isn't something that's difficult to understand.
Her attractiveness is the only thing even remotely relative to sex appeal, but again, that's nothing we don't see out in real life basically every day. Just going through normal life will have you walk past attractive people, and you'll often see women wearing the kind of outfit ZSS is with the two-piece when jogging. It's funny how no one complains there, but people have no issue crying foul when it's a video game. (I again point to the bandwagon.)
There's no arguing against this. It's a major problem that needs to be taken out back and shot in the head as soon as possible. ...However, Smash isn't part of this ugly picture, so it's rather irrelevant when discussing the series.
Garo said:
I’m going to answer this on the merits of it truly being “idealization” as you claim it to be, but let me make this clear – this is merely your interpretation of it. I know many, many women and a few gay men who view muscles on a man to be sexually attractive. What you view as “idealization” is commonly viewed as something desirable among those who find men attractive, and you can’t assign that trait as something that isn’t sexual. The fact that you view woman traits as universally sexual and not men traits speaks enough about the double-standard we currently suffer through, especially when it comes to this Smash game, which is my main point.
But even if I take your word for it 100% and concede that muscles aren’t a sexual trait, “idealization” is something that’s complained about just as much in not only the video game industry, but the entertainment industry as a whole. I should clarify that this satirical piece is not a critique of the entertainment industry as a whole, nor a critique of even the video game industry; it’s a look at the newest game in the Smash series, and how complaints of Samus’ new designs and outfits are completely blown-over and unnecessary. Having said that, “idealization” does the exact same thing that you claim the different “sexualization” does, which makes others, namely the players, feel inadequate about their bodies. Samus’ traits are not so outlandish that no woman on earth has them; this is the same as characters like Little Mac or Ike to men. So why is it a problem when Smash portrays a “perfect” woman with gorgeous features, but it’s perfectly fine to depict “perfect”, hulking men with massive muscles? As I said in the OP, Smash has already proved that it doesn’t need these type of men to function. Do I really have a problem with either scenario? No, or course not. But just trying to sweep everything under the rug when it comes to males by pointing our fingers and saying “nope, it’s IDEALIZATION, guys, it’s okay” just perpetuates the problem I’m trying to point out even more.
Garo said:
Yes, because Smash has always been completely realistic when it comes to fighting. The male characters demonstrate the exact same feature that you try to highlight as something bad. The Captain Falcon picture I posted in the original title was exactly what you and others try to complain about when it comes to women; Falcon is in a suggestive position, with his rear-end clearly highlighted to face the camera and show it off. You simply cannot spin this as “idealization” like you try to with everything else; although I don’t have in-depth conversations with females and gay men about whether or not they find the male rear-end attractive, it’s nearly impossible to claim that rear-ends aren’t seen as sexual traits for both male and female. It also stands to reason that Captain Falcon is in skin-tight clothing that makes prominent ALL his sexual features – you can make the argument all you want for the muscles, but how do you explain the nipples, the overly-large bulge, and the skin-tight rear-end? Are those also okay because they “idealization” and people want to play as someone like that in a fighting game? No, the nipples, bulge, and rear-end have no practical use in battle, so there’s no argument there. If you’re going to have issue with poses that Samus could theoretically have based on her move-set, you must also have a problem with the poses that Captain Falcon could theoretically have with his move-set.
These two are mutually exclusive, as they’re the same thing. People choose to ignore Captain Falcon and his nipples and rear-end, just because he’s male.
Garo said:
Once again, I find you selectively choosing what you think is universally sexual and what isn’t. I should also point out that my final point on Shulk isn’t exclusively this; you can just look to my first paragraph for your answer to why having shirtless men is as much as a problem as some people think Samus is when it comes to “perfecting” fighters (I should also point out that Shulk doesn’t display the “idealized” muscles of others, and merely has his shirt off. Is just having your shirt off “idealization”?). The Shulk point in its entirety was aimed at the other criticisms Samus has unfairly received, first being that having a different outfit than normal is sexist. 1.) Samus has worn the same zero suit and shorts before, just like Shulk can go through the entire game in his underwear. 2.) Samus’ (fan-created for the most part) character is not done a disservice in this game at all, just like Shulk retains his good character and personality despite being in nothing but a swimsuit. 3.) These “suggestive” poses that Sakurai puts in the pictures are not just exclusive to Samus, and Shulk is arguably worse with his pouncing on a helpless and unconscious Luigi with nothing but trunks.
The honest truth is that Smash doesn’t truly have a problem with males or females at all. The true problem is people trying to take high-ground and make something out of nothing.
Female characters are sexy: "Quit objectifying us!"
Male characters are sexy: "That's just how healthy men look!"
Deplorable.
Male characters are sexy: "That's just how healthy men look!"
Deplorable.
Terminus
If I was a wizard this wouldn't be happening to me
Sexulization:
Not sexualization:
Not sexualization:
Not sexist:
Sexist????:
Sexist????:
JuicieJ
SHOW ME YA MOVES!
Since we're going with images, this image I threw together sums up the situation quite nicely:
The hypocrisy is real.
The hypocrisy is real.
Sydney
The Good Samaritan
Why does everyone have to get all pissy about sexual objectification? Why can't we all just appreciate the abs and boobs???? Like video game companies are literally giving you free boobs and rockin' abs and yet you're complaining. Get your priorities in order, damnit.
JuicieJ
SHOW ME YA MOVES!
Why can't I give this post more than one "Yeah!"???
JuicieJ
SHOW ME YA MOVES!
Exactly how is pointing out a fallacy a circlejerk?