Ser Scot A Ellison Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 Here you go:https://www.kotaku.com.au/2013/07/japans-latest-popular-online-game-has-anthropomorphic-battleships/ I would love for someone who is part of GG who claims that Videogames don't objectify women explain how anthropomorphic anime battleships that the players pay real money to "marry" is not clearly objectification of women. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordfish Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 11 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Here you go:https://www.kotaku.com.au/2013/07/japans-latest-popular-online-game-has-anthropomorphic-battleships/ Perhaps it would make more sense for you to first explain why you think it is, rather than simply expecting people to tell you when they stopped beating their wife. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DunderMifflin Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 It's anthropomorphism, the complete opposite of objectification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted April 26, 2017 Author Share Posted April 26, 2017 They are anthropomorphic naval vessels that the players "marry". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DunderMifflin Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 Sounds fun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 Scot, if you want to discuss this, you are going to need to put a bit more effort into this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channel4s-JonSnow Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 Firstly I'm not sure why you think anyone here is part of Gamergate. Secondly I'm not sure what this has to do with Gamergate. Thirdly... well I'm just not sure what the hell this thread is about: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 Actually, it's about ethics in anthropomorphic Japanese battleships Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channel4s-JonSnow Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 2 minutes ago, Kalbear said: Actually, it's about ethics in anthropomorphic Japanese battleships Ahhhhhh! Thanks. I get it now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted April 26, 2017 Author Share Posted April 26, 2017 16 minutes ago, Kalbear said: Actually, it's about ethics in anthropomorphic Japanese battleships +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DunderMifflin Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 Actually it's more like cultural appropriation. Anime characters overwhelmingly look like white Americans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry of the Lawn Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 3 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said: Actually it's more like cultural appropriation. Anime characters overwhelmingly look like white Americans. How is that cultural appropriation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DunderMifflin Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 1 minute ago, larrytheimp said: How is that cultural appropriation? The same way anything is when that term gets thrown out there. I wasn't being serious but historically anime certainly fits the criteria for many other things I see getting labeled as cultural appropriation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aceluby Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 Video game, movies, and TV shows objectify women. Next up at 11, water is wet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted April 26, 2017 Author Share Posted April 26, 2017 3 minutes ago, aceluby said: Video game, movies, and TV shows objectify women. Next up at 11, water is wet. ace, Yes, but Gamergaters claim they don't. That's the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DunderMifflin Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 Which side was the gamergaters again? All sides of that news cycle were ridiculous. Anita Scamladyreesian and those trolling her, all of that was pretty much bullshit from all sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aceluby Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said: Yes, but Gamergaters claim they don't. I guess I'll have to take your word on it that the collective who calls themselves 'Gamergaters' hive mind all believe this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DunderMifflin Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 Whatever side that complained about female video game characters won big time, they should stop complaining. Video games now have FAR more restrictions and taboos for what they are allowed to do with a female character than ANY other entertainment medium and it's not even close. The results of those campaigns have left us nothing but boring and lifeless female video game characters with zero personality. But hey, the complainers got what they wanted, victory on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingintheNorth4 Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 Marrying talking vessels? Sounds kinky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aceluby Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 14 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said: Whatever side that complained about female video game characters won big time, they should stop complaining. Video games now have FAR more restrictions and taboos for what they are allowed to do with a female character than ANY other entertainment medium and it's not even close. The results of those campaigns have left us nothing but boring and lifeless female video game characters with zero personality. But hey, the complainers got what they wanted, victory on them. This is such a stupidly ridiculous critique. What restrictions are you talking about? What taboos? Who is doing the critiquing? Why have these contributed to characters having zero personality, and how does that contrast to them being more objectified? As-is, the above comment is completely meaningless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.