men are typically depicted in video games as disposable to a far greater extent than women are, if your argument is that depictions of either gender in video games must be positive then its rather bizarre that the issue of male disposability doesn't seem to be on your radar(well not really since i understand how the ideology works far better than most of its proponents funny enough)
but regardless if the argument is narrowed down to presentation only, well men are idealised in terms of their designs just as much as women are
but 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
but obviously they can't acknowledge that, if at the base of their perception is the stupid idea that men and women are the same and have the exact same motivations and drives can they?
lol, I think people completely miss the mark in terms of sexualisation comparisons. Idealised =/=Sexualised.
Now street fighter would never be a target of sony and I think this whole OP is greatly out of context, sexualisation is not being cut out of games. But on the topic the first image in your comparison is not sexualised, the second is. Aa straight man probably wouldn't see this. That Ryu depiction is coming from straight male gaze and which is not driven by sexualisation but more by ideals of masculinity. His whole outfit is also functional, whereas the latter is literally about sexualisation. I mean the developers went through the effort to make the leotard essentially so tight its painted on, it originally also had faint nipple imprints which obviously placed there by horny artists/art directors...Â
Emphasis on crotch shots... Military outfits centred on sideboobs lol...Compelely random outfits there to sell the anatomy
If Ryu & the other male charcters were sexualised the same you would probably have:
1) more varied body types and not just steroid bodies
2) Random nudity creeping into male outfits where it doesn't belong & outfits existing just to tease
3) Far more chest hair, V-lines & Butt emphasis.
4) More hansome faces (although beareded Ryu and Rashid are babes <3)
" Idealised =/=Sexualised."
in the context of physical makeup, they are the exact same thing
"sexualisation is not being cut out of games."
it is and honestly i wouldn't have a problem with that if the reason was logical and consistent
"His whole outfit is also functional, whereas the latter is literally about sexualisation."
men and women in terms of their dress often typically display this difference, in that men generally dress more practically whereas women dress to emphasize their sexual appeal more
this is why makeup, heels, low cut dresses etc etc etc exist but of course its not politically correct to point out these differences in how men and women present themselves
this is why its pretty idiotic for sjws to claim "WOMEN NEED TO BE DEPICTED THE SAME AS MEN IN GAMES OR ELSE BOYS WILL BE SOCIALISED TO THINK WOMEN ARE SEXUAL OBJECTS"... the obvious rebuttal is what are you going to do about the way real women present themselves? if this argument is actually valid (which its obviously not) why wouldn't the kim kardassians and ava roses of the world do the same?
"Emphasis on crotch shots... Military outfits centred on sideboobs lol...Compelely random outfits there to sell the anatomy"
its almost as bad as if they were shirtless
"If Ryu & the other male charcters were sexualised the same"
men and women are not the same and are attracted to different things
"more varied body types and not just steroid bodies"
i don't think you are going to find many people who find fat/short men more attractive than muscular/tall men
"Random nudity creeping into male outfits where it doesn't belong & outfits existing just to tease"
being shirtless is not nudity? how far would we need to go to put men on the same level as women wearing at the very least dancing outfits?
Last edited by o_O.Q - on 18 April 2019