Our rating board in germany is pretty strict and believe me sexualization of underage girls is not tolerated here in germany, still they had no issue rating some games that were censored in the PS4 version but not others. It's not an issue about underage girls in sexualized context, it is an issue about applying a conservative morale to everyone.

Agreed. If people think that is unacceptable, they should push to outlaw it, not applauding arbitrary decisions internally in a company.

Good. While I've purchased two senran Kagura games and there isn't much detail, it's hard to deny what their purpose was. I buy any game with a sexy female in it and the two I bought (Estival Vs and Peach Beach Splash) were no exception. I probably logged in less than an hour with each. They were just too much and no matter what the game says, those characters were kids.

It is only a problem if you only play on Sony consoles. I pick multiplats for pc and only have a Sony console for exclusives. So this shit won't affect me.

"The concept of male expendability is a homogenic one.  Men applied them to ourselves.  We are not deemed expendable by the actions or directions of women."

so in countries where women have been queens or some other type of political leader where as has been consistent throughout history the men were seen as more disposable it was still the fault of men even though they didn't have the power?

you understand that this type of denial of the agency of women does nothing to help them right? i'm sure you think the opposite but you are just making things harder for women when you deny their contributions to structuring society especially their negative contributions because obviously if we can't discuss them then nothing can be done about them

"Women are not generally responsible for creating or designing underage looking women in sexualized scenarios."

i didn't make this argument so i have nothing to say on it

"And yes, sexualization has meaning."

it does not... and to demonstrate that it does not is rather easy...

take a naked woman and put her in front of a gay man, since he's gay he won't be stimulated by her

ok now instead take a blind man and put the same woman in front of him... still no effect right?

ok finally take a heterosexual man and place the same woman in front of him, well then there may be a response but not necessarily, depending on what features the man is attracted to in women he may or may not be stimulated

the point here is that sexual desire is subjective... which means that you can't apply an objective standard to it

to elaborate further i could ask you to list examples of what you consider to be instances of sexualisation like lets say cleavage and i could list examples of not just gay or blind men but heterosexual men that would not find that attractive

the human body is just an object, it is you perceiving it as sexual due to whatever biases you have and using that as a tool

"Women depicted oversexualized without any relation to a given situation 

am i to understand that oversexualised refers to not being covered? why do you think women should be covered?

"(e.g. a male soldier will be dressed for combat while a female soldier will be dressed for...certainly not combat).""

sounds pretty much like the variation in dress that we see in real life between men and women - men go to work in suits while women where high heels, makeup etc etc etc(not that i think that is a problem)

do you think then that people should all be forced to wear suits as a uniform at work in real life then?

Wow. The far left has achieved what the right could only dream of. This puritanical crackdown on games is sickening.
As adults we should be able to enjoy the entire spectrum of games available without censorship.
There is a reason why we have classifications for God's sake.
In any case this isn't all that surprising as major corporations will do what's necessary to avoid PR hits.

If your entertainment is sexually explicit games with under-aged characters then I have some concerns of my own. 

I'm not interested in going back and forth with you, so lets drop some of those ideological topics and go back to where this discussion began. 

1) You imply the character design is a reflection of how woman perceive and idealise themselves. Thus female and male characters are equivalents and equals in how they're created.

You: "people who are infested with the equality doctrine just dishonesty hand wave this away as "male power fantasy" without acknowledging that to be sexy and to be desired is an ideal for women just as much as being strong and powerful is an ideal for men"

I argue character design of both male and female characters is about male fantasy primarily and thus is unbalanced. I challenge your notion by asking you how female characters derived from a female team would look. By your logic, it would be just as sexualised because woman's fantasy's are to be desired.

Me: "How would a predominantly female team design their rooster of female characters?"

You: "i don't care, i'm not a sexist so it doesn't matter to me what sex a designer is"

......As a non-sexist maybe we can put more stock on arguments brought up actual woman and look to their own works for examples of how they'd like to be represented.

2. Yes sexualisation is about intent, and it is distinct from "sexuality".

You: "you seem to be arguing here that sexuality is about intent"

Sexuality is not about intent but sexualisation is, no one is trying to dictate your sexuality. I'm sure you're understand "sexualisation" in another context. Its a not problem that a video game has young underage characters in traditional swimwear during a beach scene. Its a problem that the camera pivots up their legs to sexualise them or that the designers alter the design of the swimwear to introduce a sexual context, sexualisation is the attempt to present something as a sexual object. In the less extreme case, we're looking at adult characters like SF5, its absolutely fair that people may find it off putting that all female character seem to first be designed around being objectified as sexual objects. 

Now when discussing adult characters, that can be ok, there's a time and place for everything. It doesn't have to be that serious. But then please don't make arguments that the male characters are designed with equal mentality in mind or reducing valid critic to "toxic femininity".

Its so nice to remember the days before game companies had an agenda.

Edit: I am just going to pay more attention to what I am interested in on the Sony side of things and not buy or support it, if it affects what I play which doesnt seem like much, yet, but usually this kind of thing just doesnt stop where it starts.

"I argue character design of both male and female characters is about male fantasy primarily and thus is unbalanced."

lol so tell me why are the kardassians, rhianna, nicky minaj etc etc etc for example idolosed by women? you think its men giving them their fame and prominence?

all of these women share the same body types we see in games as being ideal and use them unabashedly to generate their fame

so if i'm understanding your argument correctly, you don't actually believe women have an ideal physical form they generally aspire to become?

"I challenge your notion by asking you how female characters derived from a female team would look."

which is not necessary since we can look at the women that are brought most to prominence in the public by women as i have done above

i don't know of any female design teams and i don't care to know of any

"By your logic, it would be just as sexualised because woman's fantasy's are to be desired."

and again i'm asking you to define what exactly sexualised means

are you speaking of wearing less or no clothing?

does that means therefore that women sexualise themselves when taking showers?

does that means that when kim kardassian takes an almost naked photo of herself and puts it on the net that she is sexualising herself?

i honestly do not understand how anyone with any presence of mind thinks that word means something

"As a non-sexist maybe we can put more stock on arguments brought up actual woman and look to their own works for examples of how they'd like to be represented."

for one thing i could quite easily list female artists that draw half naked or naked women as their work

but regardless that doesn't make any sense, if you want to condense down the general motivations of a group, you need to look at the behavior of that group

which is why i say we look at how women present themselves and who they idolise as what they aspire to be

how many female scientists do you know of? can you list 5? why is that?

i guess that's the patriarchy working even though kim kardassian has like 1 billion followers

"Yes sexualisation is about intent, and it is distinct from "sexuality""

and how do you assess intent in this context?

"the camera pivots up their legs to sexualise them"

first off i never spoke about underage people so i'm going to state clearly right now that i'm talking about adults

why is a camera panning up the legs of a woman a problem?

" its absolutely fair that people may find it off putting that all female character seem to first be designed around being objectified as sexual objects."

street fighter is a game where women showcase their fighting abilities, why are you reducing them down to sexual objects?