|
Kasz216 said: A) The boss thing isn't any general consensus i've heard of before. Outside which, not sure why you'd think that gives him a pass. That's more or less the "I can't be racist I have a black friend!" Line of arguement. |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boss_%28Metal_Gear%29#Reception
The character was very well received by media. According to Eurogamer, "The Boss is often touted as being one of the strongest female characters in gaming."[9] Some are even calling her "arguably the single most amazing female character in all of video games."[13]
In 2007, Tom's Games included The Boss among the 50 greatest female characters in video game history, proposing that she should be portrayed in a live-action adaptation by "Sharon Stone, who reportedly served as the inspiration for the character's design."[14] In 2011, UGO included her on their list of the 50 top "video game hotties", commenting that "The Boss is a bit of a tough one because we instantly find her attractive, but we can't find a hint of sexuality to her at all," and adding that "of all the ladies on our list, she's the one we'd be the most wary to mess with."[15] That same year, GamingUnion.net included The Boss on their list of top ten video game heroines for "her sheer strength and determination", similarly commenting "we will simply say the Boss is one chick you do not want to mess with which is why we've given her the number 7 spot."[16]
As far as I know, it's a rather popular opinion... As much consensus as you could possibly get in gaming. It's not a "free pass" that can excuse any "sexist" attitude he might have had, sure, but it's certainly a key element to take into account. And I believe it could be enough to disprove the idea of a "sexist" trend from him/MGS, and instead evaluate things on a case by case basis at least.
Regarding your points B and C, I'm still going to need the whole context, so I won't make any definitive judgment here. I'll just point out a few things about what you said:
- Getting to see the girl in a bikini does not qualify as sexual contact, of course. It falls pretty much on the same "grey area" I mentioned before. Is there something here beyond voyeurism ? Because regardless of personal views, this kind of fanservice is too common to be noteworthy...
- It doesn't surprise me that only the girls are shown here. The target audience for these games are of course men, and there's nothing wrong with it. Not every game has to be made for both genders (or sexual orientations). If we were to somehow force developers to make every game cater to every demographic out there, you would end up with many "design by committee" games that satisfy no one, as well as impacting creativity severely. Games for everyone ? Yes. Every game for everyone ? No.
D) Additionally, showing skin for comedies effect vs showing it for an alluring reason is again, obviously different... and yeah, only further points to his immaturity.
Yes, the context and intent here does make the situation different. Still, I don't remember Seinfeld's justification being challenged in any way, so I think it was just presented as an embarrassing situation, as opposed to suggesting that he and George were "perverts". That's why I mentioned it. Because I'm guessing most people would understand the idea that peeking at a 16-year old doesn't necessarily make you a "pervert". That our bodies don't rigidly adhere to these rational rules and specific numbers.
Now, since you're evaluating things here differently according to their context and intent, can we just agree that we don't have enough of these elements to judge that MGS V character either way ? ^_^
E) As for cultural. Well yeah. Japan will often portray even young girls like 8 year olds in bathing suits. Japan is... kinda creepy.
With all due respect, don't you guys have some beauty contests in the US involving children which are also questionable from this very same point of view ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_beauty_pageant#Sexualization
It doesn't seem fair to single out Japan here... Of course, Japan is indeed more lenient when it comes to fictional representations of sexual nature in different ways, which includes lolicon for example. And personally, I'm fine with this, as I see it in the same way as I see violence. Fictional characters are not real, so harm can't be done in any way... And not liking something is not enough excuse for me to oppose its existance.
It's also worth noting here that portraying an 8-year old in a bathing suit is not always meant to be arousing, obviously... Children regularly go to the beach around the world in their bathing suits and no one has tried to ban this, that I know of. And as an example here, Goku is often shown naked as a child in Dragon Ball with drawn genitalia, yet that's clearly not meant to be sexual. It's also often censored in the West...
But I digress... The point here is that the context and actions define the situation. And that "creepy" is a relative term...
At the end of the day, shouldn't we take into account the fact that we're experiencing a foreign work and adjust our expectations accordingly ? Or should we just judge them based on our own cultural standards, ignoring its origin ? I believe in the former... In fact, I see it as part of the point of experiencing them... What makes them different is what makes them stand out from our own. And I definitely don't want this diversity to disappear to satisfy those who can't tolerate it...
PS: My last post on the subject, unless you have a question for me or something to clarify. I wrote enough ! >.< I'll read anything you want to add though.
