The Campaign Builder's Guild

Quote from: Salacious_AngelThat's the problem right there. I seriously, seriously beg to differ.
...
(I'd gladly give my reasoned arguments why - since it's a fiction people really do take incredibly seriously - but not in this dinky little sidebar)

That's just it though--people saying rape culture isn't a problem is the problem.  And I understand why you don't believe it.  It's still fiction to you.  However, I remain puzzled as to why you don't believe it because the author provided ample evidence in the forms of facts and visual aids.  

"In the recent demo Hotline Miami 2: Wrong Number, Pig Butcher approaches the only woman in the demo with the screen ordering "FINISH HER" and drops his pants. Then the director screams "Cut!" Of course they wouldn't rape a woman...Because the most horrifying thing that can happen to a woman isn't a real issue, it's just a game, it was a joke, don't take it so serious, and now you understand rape culture."

~~~~~~~~~~~

Rape culture is when a woman is kidnapped, sexually assaulted, and peed on with the entire footage blasted on the internet and the media laments how the boys who did it—now their lives are ruined.  The term "rape culture" was coined very recently, in response to the Steubanville case.  So many people thought it was funny, what happened to the girl.  It was normal.  She drank too much, she dressed too suggestively, she deserved it.  

It shifts the focus off of the rapist and onto the (most of the time) woman where it doesn't belong.

Everyone who is interested in continuing this discussion, please read the following article in its entirety.

http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-sexist-video-game-problems-even-bigger-than-breasts/

You only alluded to this in the chatbox, but my biggest contention whenever this discussion comes up is the notion - one I have with some frequency heard expressed over the past year or so  - that a woman who is intoxicated to any degree cannot give consent. Alcohol does not make anyone do anything against their will.

I am not contesting that a person overintoxicated to the point where they are rendered physically helpless can give consent. They cannot. I will admit that this is not necessarily a clear cut issue, but I think it's really a matter of just using common sense to determine when someone is too drunk.

I think focusing entirely on how drunk she is misses the real heart of the problem: that it's still considered acceptable to encourage women to consume large quantities of mind-altering substances for the sole purpose of getting them to sleep with you.

I shall be succinct, but first let me add to Seraphine's instruction that you should also read the comments beneath the article. Many of the posters there address the article's flaws, and it would be misspent energy to repeat their rebuttals here. As for my own points:

Quote from: Seraphine_Harmonium"Rape Culture" may be a new term but it definitely describes a real tendency in American society to endorse socially acceptable forms of rape, such as getting a girl drunk

This is a heavy statement to make.

Endorsing/socially acceptable/forms of rape/such as getting a girl drunk. This assumes the following, working backwards:

• That getting a girl drunk is a form of rape. This may be true legally speaking - I cannot speak to the follies of American jurisprudence. It is not, actually rape. It can be morally objectionable, even reprehensible, but it isn't rape. Rape is a specific kind of thing and I reject the continuing efforts to soften its definition.
  
  
• That this behaviour is socially acceptable. I grant that many (I will not grant the majority) of young men I once associated with would feel no compunctions against plying a woman with alcohol. I do not, however, know many who were not similarly inebriated at the time. Even if they were sober and intending to intoxicate the woman, she retains her agency and responsibilities as an adult. Even granting your point for the sake of argument, it nevertheless remains that "socially acceptable" means two totally different things depending on the moral status of the first point. It is either socially acceptable rape or socially acceptable not-rape. This makes all the difference in the world.
  
  
• That American society tends to endorse this behaviour. Endorsement and acceptance are not the same thing, so it is important to separate these two points. I'll assume you did not mean that society "puts forward", "publicly approves" or "supports" these behaviours, whether they constitute rape or not. If you did, well... we don't merely live on different continents, but different planets.

Quoteas well as attitudes like "slut-shaming" and victim blaming.

I've known a great many sluts and a fair few victims both here and in the USA. These "attitudes" toward sluts and victims are alien to me and my milieu. I will not pretend that they do not exist, but their existing is no evidence of their being endemic, accepted or endorsed.

QuoteThese things aren't just made up by feminazis.

Yes. Yes they really are.

Quote"In the recent demo Hotline Miami 2: Wrong Number, Pig Butcher approaches the only woman in the demo with the screen ordering "FINISH HER" and drops his pants. Then the director screams "Cut!" Of course they wouldn't rape a woman...Because the most horrifying thing that can happen to a woman isn't a real issue, it's just a game, it was a joke, don't take it so serious, and now you understand rape culture."

Or how about in the first game where you kill in excess of several hundred men in extraordinarily violent ways but the first woman you encounter (a strung out junkie) you rescue from the bloodbath and detox. Both games are filled with the violent murder of men. It is testament to our positive attitudes concerning rape that your aforementioned scene has more emotional impact than the holocaust that precedes it. Now I could argue this as proof that men are in fact disenfranchised in gaming. But I won't. Because it's simplistic.

QuoteRape culture is when a woman is kidnapped, sexually assaulted, and peed on with the entire footage blasted on the internet and the media laments how the boys who did it—now their lives are ruined.

Some elements of the media might have done this. Members of her own community certainly did. "The media" certainly did not. This mischaracterises the whole event.

QuoteThe term "rape culture" was coined very recently, in response to the Steubanville case.

I don't care how recent it is. It is loaded, specious and inflammatory and deserves to be picked apart (so do the terms misogyny and misandry, but that's for later). It would deserve to be picked apart even if it represented a legitimite phenomenon. But it doesn't.

Quote from: SuperbrightI think focusing entirely on how drunk she is misses the real heart of the problem: that it's still considered acceptable to encourage women to consume large quantities of mind-altering substances for the sole purpose of getting them to sleep with you.

We are not talking about whether it is acceptable. The question is: does that "culturally acceptable" behaviour constitute rape, not definitionally (people may define anything however they like, shifting the language to serve their agenda) but morally. We are talking about Rape culture. That incredibly loaded word was chosen for its unassailability (who wants to be a rape apologist?), so as a lover of honest discourse and clear communication I'm here to assail it.

In summary: I can grant that there is much wrong with cultural attitudes regarding sex, sexuality and the sexes. And that gaming's gender representations are in need of correction (the question of how deserves a conversation of its own). It remains that the article's thesis is fatally, poisonously flawed. It contributes nothing of value to the conversation. The four of us could explore this topic far more compellingly than Cracked did. Perhaps we should.

Having played WoW for a while with a female character, I can say stuff like the Fat, Ugly or Slutty happens a lot.  I was solicited, begged for webcam chats/photos and sent more than a few inappropriate comments, links and photos.

Rape culture exists because a vocal minority of men want to be pigs and society endorses and encourages their behavior through deed, leniency and excuses.

The worst comments I have seen for this disgusting culture are ones where people say stuff like, "you know she enjoyed it!" or "by the end of it, she had a smile on her face!" Absolutely disgusting.

(http://socialmediasatisfied.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/inigo-montoya.jpg)

"Rape Culture" is not the endorsement of chauvinistic behaviour.

I will say it again: using the word "rape" to describe things that are not-nearly-halfway-kinda-even-sorta-like rape is specious and destructive. It's not clever rhetoric, it's insidious Newspeak (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak). Those of you who honestly believe " society endorses and encourages their behavior through deed, leniency and excuses" had better pony up with some hard proof genuinely demonstrating the majority's endorsement of rape.

Pointing to gaming culture is wholly insufficient. The silent gaming majority have nothing invested in the defense of those aggrieved by the abuses of the minority because they aren't paying to undertake a social justice cause. That is not their responsibility. So maybe the good eggs don't say anything because they're busy getting their money's worth, not because they endorse reprehensible behaviour. Do not attribute intent to the millions of gamers whom you've never met and whose motives you simply cannot discern.

Also, however real a problem chauvinism might otherwise be in gaming, it is not indicative of the same reality offline. Rape culture is about the society at large, not some selective account of gaming's digital microcosm. Show me how our society is a rape culture. Not chauvinistic. A rape culture.

My only input at this stage in the discussion is to state my objections to the complaints levied at "Other M" and the "Lara Croft" reboot in that article; I object, end of objections. I won't waist a whole lot of my finger strength type/defending the games, though, as it's largely irrelevant. All I'll say is that the use of trope-worthy elements when expanding a character's depth from a simple one-dimensional description to a full, living, breathing character, are not bad things, unless that character becomes solely the trope. Turn tropes on their head if you want, but the use of them isn't immediately sinful.

To the rest of the discussion, there is an issue at large in society when things are overlooked, or worse entirely turned around. Blaming the victim is probably the worst thing I've seen. "Boys will be boys" as an explanation is pretty bad too, if only for it's foundational position in many people's lives. The fact that a large chunk of society is trained how to avoid behavior almost makes it sound like that behavior is a force of nature that can't be trained.

This happens in a lot of areas other than issues now called "rape culture". Rather than treating the source of the problem, we work to prevent the symptoms. I won't get into analogies, though, as I feel comparing anything else to "don't rape" belittles the horror of the act.

And as to the repeatedly mentioned "getting a woman drunk" issue that keeps coming up, one thing to remember is that rape doesn't mean "forced rape". Alcohol might not make you do something you aren't choosing to do (while your conscious at least), but it does remove your inhibitions. Lets say I was suitably drunk at a party, and a friend who is not my wife is hitting on me. Well, I'm too drunk to tell myself it's a bad idea, so I go through with it. Now, I'm probably not going to call that a rape, unless the friend liquored me up with the explicit intention to seduce me. Then again ... I don't know, it hasn't happened to me.

I do know people that object to the use of the word "rape" to mean "to conquer" or "to destroy", a use of it very frequently used by gamers.

  From Wikipedia: "Rape culture is a concept which links rape and sexual violence to the culture of a society,[1] and in which prevalent attitudes and practices normalize, excuse, tolerate, or even condone rape.[2]

Examples of behaviors commonly associated with rape culture include victim blaming, sexual objectification, and trivializing rape."

From Wikipedia: "The U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, which defines rape as penetration by the offender, and excludes rape by envelopment,[111] states that 91% of rape victims are female and 9% are male, and 99% of rapists are male.[112] One of six U.S. women has experienced an attempted or completed rape.[113] More than a quarter of college age women report having experienced a rape or rape attempt since age 14."

From Wikipedia: "Rape prevalence among women in the U.S. (the percentage of women who experienced rape at least once in their lifetime so far) is in the range of 15%–20%, with different studies agreeing with each other. (National Violence against Women survey, 1995, found 17.6% prevalence rate;[5] a 2007 national study for the Department of Justice on rape found 18% prevalence rate.[6])"

From Wikipedia: "The 2010 National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey found that 13.1% of lesbians, 46.1% of bisexual women, and 17.4% of heterosexual women have been raped.[10] In a San Francisco study, 68% of trans women and 55% of trans men reported having been raped.[11]"

From Wikipedia: "The USA reports about 85,000 rapes a year, about 29 rapes per 100,000 population (58 rapes every year per 100,000 women).[27] There is a rape in the US every 6.2 minutes, with 1 in 5 women likely to be raped in her lifetime."


Prison Rape jokes (like "don't drop the soap") are very common. These jokes are tolerated because, "you're in prison for a reason."

Rape in the military is horrifyingly high (where victims are of both genders), yet nothing is really done to punish the rapists.

Like I mentioned with WoW, I received many lewd comments. One person even thought that, because my Blood Elf Paladin was so "hot," that I must be super hot as well, and therefore assumed it would be acceptable to send a picture of his genitals to me and ask if the sight of his manhood made me wet.

The fact that wikipedia describes an idea does not mean it describes an actual phenomenon that exists. I won't take wikipedia seriously as a source of quotable information and nor should you.

Both your Bureau of Justice and Center for Disease Control exclude envelopment from their definitions of rape. This makes determining the prevalence of non-penetrative female-initiated rape literally impossible. So we don't actually have rape statistics. We have penetration statistics.

Also, "very common" and "horrifyingly high" are not figures. They contain no data. They are weasel words.

So far you have presented only one-sided and incomplete statistics for rape itself and none whatsoever for the social perspective thereof. This is thoroughly unconvincing.

Quote from: Elemental_ElfPrison Rape jokes (like "don't drop the soap") are very common. These jokes are tolerated because, "you're in prison for a reason."

Or because people can appreciate black humour. I like Dead Baby Jokes. They're funny to me because they're fucked up and reprehensible. Not because I endorse the killing of babies. Other people might tolerate these jokes because they're cool with infanticide, but it's not for me to say. Don't impute motive.

QuoteLike I mentioned with WoW, I received many lewd comments. One person even thought that, because my Blood Elf Paladin was so "hot," that I must be super hot as well, and therefore assumed it would be acceptable to send a picture of his genitals to me and ask if the sight of his manhood made me wet.

Again, chauvinism, not rape. I'm not talking about what I'm not talking about.

Quote from: XeviatLets say I was suitably drunk at a party, and a friend who is not my wife is hitting on me. Well, I'm too drunk to tell myself it's a bad idea, so I go through with it.

This dovetails into a new conversation about agency and culpability in a culture that endorses (Hah! That word again) the consumption of judgment-eroding substances. It's not "blaming the victim", but something remains to be said about permitting the abdication of personal agency.

This is a sensitive topic and I suggest people tread lightly. Before you hit "post", please walk away from your computer and think about whether or not what you have to say is really worth it.

Several points relating to rape culture and feminisim:

The term "rape culture" is not new. It dates to at least the 1975 film Rape Culture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_Culture_(film)) and has been widely used at least in academia since then.

The term "rape culture" does not have a universally agreed upon definition. The two most popular seem to be both in use in this thread. The first came from second wave feminism (which I'll address specifically below), and that is essentially a culture where rape is at the very least normalized, up to where it is condoned. The second does seem to be more recent, and includes the normalization not only of rape, but of all forms of sexual violence. Keep in mind that rape culture is only posited as a contributing factor towards rape. When people say it "endorses" rape, they do not mean (in most cases) the culture actively promotes sexual violence. Instead, the culture allows rapists to continue to rape because it turns a blind eye (essentially "if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem"). Quibbling over the definition, though, is not very helpful.

It is very important to understand the context in which the term "rape culture", as well as "radical", or second-wave feminism arose. This, by the way, is most often the kind of feminism associated with "feminazis", even though the vast majority (all?) of work done in it was not at all like people's conceptions of "feminazis", and many of the concepts that it introduced are now taken for granted even outside of academia.

So, a brief history of feminism. First-wave feminism is the label applied to a number of movements from the 19th century to the early 20th century. This is most associated with the women's suffrage movement, and I think it's important to reflect on just how recently women even in Western Europe and North America got the right to vote (1944 for universal women's suffrage in France, 1928 in Great Britain, and 1919 in the United States). So women not having the right to vote has only quite recently started to pass beyond living memory. It's also important to keep in mind that this was coupled with other movements for political rights, such as the right to hold property in their own name (rather than it being entirely owned by their husbands); in the US, Maine was the first state to grant this right completely in 1844.

Second-wave feminism begins in the 1960s, and its main focus was on many of the remaining inequalities, especially (though certainly not limited to) those that were not confined to the law, especially influencing how society viewed women (i.e., the shift from unequal to equal in terms of the kinds and durations of careers, attitudes towards being able to express one's sexuality, etc.). Many issues they tackled lead directly to the kinds of things we're discussing here. For instance, the illegalization of marital rape in the US was begun under second-wave feminism (but notably this took quite some time--the last state to make it illegal was North Carolina in 1993). Certainly, even under a very narrow definition of rape culture, this is condoning (by silence and inactivity on the matter) rape, at least in a specific case.

Perhaps due in part to a few extreme cases, but I think really just a latter day conservative backlash against feminism upsetting the normal cultural values in the US and elsewhere, second-wave feminism often has the people who are considered to be the most radical of all the feminists. Of course, the one person here that ever said anything like "All men are rapists" (which at least some people do believe was a thing that someone involved in second-wave feminism actually said and believed), was the words of the fictional character Val in Marilyn French's (fictional) novel The Women's Room. And, as usual, this actual quotation is much more nuanced when not taken out of context: "Whatever they may be in public life, whatever their relationships with men, in their relationships with women, all men are rapists, and that's all they are. They rape us with their eyes, their laws, and their codes."

Feminism after this gets a lot of different labels, and since labeling them isn't really going to be a productive part of my discussion going forward, I'll save my own sanity and not try to cover everything. If you are interested, the Wikipedia articles on the subject are thorough and supported with proper citations.

Finally, someone has of course brought up the so-called "feminazis", or perhaps better "straw feminists" (see above in part). First a point, then a question. We can thank Rush Limbaugh, the US conservative radio host, for popularizing the term (he claims one of his friends made it up). His views on feminism are just a bit extreme: "Feminism was established so as to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream of society" (from this interview (http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,976829,00.html) of him in Time.). And he claims that, for feminazis, "...the most important thing in life is ensuring that as many abortions as possible occur" (from his book The Way Things Ought to Be). I mean, I guess if we want to use the term "feminazi" we can, but I kind of question Limbaugh's accuracy at times (http://fair.org/extra-online-articles/The-Way-Things-Arent/). And certainly we would then want, as has been called for throughout the discussion, to stick strictly to Limbaugh's definition. (A note to the sarcastically impaired: some of this section was sarcasm.)

So, on to the question: in regards to this: can you name one actual, real live person who holds the beliefs you all attribute to a "feminazi"? If not, I think we really ought to consider them some kind of bogey(wo)men.

It is late. I'll address what I actually wanted to talk about (a feminist perspective on modern video games) sometime in the near future. There's a lot of very valid criticisms the Cracked article entirely misses.

Quote from: limetomThis is a sensitive topic and I suggest people tread lightly. Before you hit "post", please walk away from your computer and think about whether or not what you have to say is really worth it.

Do my posts sound heated? If so, I apologise. I was in fact enjoying this conversation. My words are succinct in the interest of economy and so may seem blunt.

Quote from: limetomin regards to this: can you name one actual, real live person who holds the beliefs you all attribute to a "feminazi"? If not, I think we really ought to consider them some kind of bogey(wo)men.

I attribute no beliefs to any feminazi. I invite you to ignore my response to Seraphine's use of the term as it is the sole ironic remark in all of my posts. Feminazis do not exist. I should have said that the ideas are simply made up, rather than agreeing that they were made up by feminazis

QuoteQuibbling over the definition, though, is not very helpful.

It's not a quibble to differentiate between "encouragement" and "allowance". If you say endorse but don't mean endorse, you are mucking about with the language (people are welcome to do this, but then we can't actually communicate) . Regardless, I have addressed both interpretations.

QuoteThe term "rape culture" does not have a universally agreed upon definition.

I shan't fight a ghost. It means one thing at least for the sake of argument or it doesn't mean anything.

I believe I have clarified my reasons for disagreeing with the thesis of the Cracked article and with the Seraphine's specific comment in the tavern. I'll respond to disputes over my own points but I will not participate in the conversation as it diverges from my original purpose. I have no positive contribution to make to a "feminist perspective on videogames", as feminism (insofar as it is an unambiguous and identifiable thing; see above) is inimical to my worldview. Seraphine graciously offered his/her(?) final word and now I have rendered mine.

So many terms and twists! Does it not suffice to say that this so called Rape-culture does not have its place?

So this conversation wouldn't be occurring if it the accepted term for this phenomena were called Chauvinism-Culture?

I am at work after a grueling trip.  So I am making excuses if I am less than up to standards for a real conversation with my friends here.  And I say that because I respect the people on this site more than almost anywhere; we have had a number of very real and useful starts and stops.  But that is what a broad cultural conversation has to be.  Because we are talking about a multifaceted culture, intellect, and biological ongoing dynamic.
I grew up in a hotbed of this, and my mother's somewhat extreme work (she was head of the New England NOW chapter, and her political career has been long) was one of the things that forced my parents apart and my formative years were filled with heated arguments between my very intellectual parents.

It has been mentioned but not specifically declared that the term 'Rape Culture', as it is used in current conversation, is a subset of Chauvinism.  It has been suggested that they are different, and this is correct; this is a Venn Diagram where the one (Rape Culture) is nearly totally inside the other (Chauvinism), but where one does not equal the other.  Making this distinction helps, I think. 
This particular Venn subset exists within others, and understanding this also is useful.

I also need to point out that this is a cross-cultural issue, that many cultures are dealing with this specific combination.  And it is not a new thing, while the term is new (historically) and like many terms, the term's actual meaning changes, or the definitions proliferate.   It is a definition of a thing that does exist, that needs defining as a culture as we grow, though I am sure my definition is different than many.  In my view, it is an attitude that reduces or negates a persons ability towards full consent in a sexual situation, and the idea that this lack of consent is an acceptable part of culture.
Please note that my definition would be another circle of the Venn Diagram, one that would greatly intersect the others, but not In Toto.  I can get into my reasoning later, if it is warranted, but suffice it to say that I believe that wrapping gender into the equation as a necessary part complicates and deprioritizes the contributing factors.  But I do believe that much of the historical, visceral and thus cultural affect is greatly, and that is an understatement, tied to gender roles and chauvinism.  I prioritize personhood above gender identity and I think it helps the conversation.

Please note that my definition clearly includes EE's examples of people sending him sexual pictures without consent.  If it was merely the chat requests or requests or jokes based purely on Gender, as opposed to sex, it would be chauvinism.  As soon as a person unambiguously 'sexualizes' this, in assuming you want such a picture without obtaining consent, I place it under the banner of Rape Culture. 

And though we are all forced to jump around (none of us can truly answer this in a short format), one thing I agree with in the article (and again, Cracked should not be taken to task too heavily nor taken too seriously, I, for one, have enjoyed their foray into pseudo-intellectualism over the last decade) is that is, paraphrased, that perception is reality to everyone, and that having the discussion, as we are, is the only way to better understand and to enable a better shared perspective.

Finally, you allow people to criticize games and gender in narratives and allow the discussion to continue within game spaces without derailing the conversation. This is the best way we can learn from each other and improve the future of gaming. If someone is trying to prevent a discussion of a problem, they are that problem.



   

Quote from: Pymtein MagnushakeDoes it not suffice to say that this so called Rape-culture does not have its place?

What that means is wholly contingent on the existence or nonexistence of rape culture.

Quote from: Elemental_ElfSo this conversation wouldn't be occurring if it the accepted term for this phenomena were called Chauvinism-Culture?

Explicitly so. Though I would also deny the existence of "chauvinism culture", I did not come here to discuss that. We can slide definitions and revise positions until the sun goes cold but what use is there in battling clouds?

After a brief rumination I realise one thing that's been disconcerting me greatly is the big fat finger pointed squarely at me in the title. This conversation isn't about me and I'll sleep better without my name attributed to it.

Quote from: Salacious Angel
After a brief rumination I realise one thing that's been disconcerting me greatly is the big fat finger pointed squarely at me in the title. This conversation isn't about me and I'll sleep better without my name attributed to it.

Makes sense to me. 

I'll tentatively contribute my thoughts, here.

Some of this debate is clearly about semantics.  In some ways the term "rape culture" is unfortunate, although I think it has emerged as the accepted term partly because of its capacity to stir strong emotions.  In Canada - as opposed to the US - we use the term "sexual assault" exclusively in our legal discourse.  There are degrees of sexual assault, of course, but any non-consensual sexual activity is considered a form of sexual assault.  Women can sexually assault women, women can sexually assault men, men can sexually assault men, and men can sexually assault women, and penetration isn't necessary for a sexual assault to occur.  I think, personally, this terminology provides a better way of examining the problem of sexual violence and aspects of our culture(s) that may normalize or trivialize that violence, because that way we spend less time debating about what exactly constitutes a rape and what doesn't.  However, since the term "rape" is still used in US criminal discourse and America is at the center of these debates, it's come to be the accepted term, for good or ill.

I think that if people want to continue this conversation, for the purposes of clarity, we should probably distinguish between debates about terminology and semantics (about the term "rape culture" itself and its strategic, political, and discursive utility) and debates about Western cutlure(s) and the very real problems it faces.  I think we should also be careful to remember that culture is big and complicated, and contains conflicting tendencies.

What concerns those who talk about rape culture - whether or not we accept the term as such - is a tendency in western society to normalize and/or trivialize sexual assault and sexual violence, often against men as well as women (prison rape has been brought up, for example).  This issue really can't be neatly divorced from chauvinism more generally.  Slut-shaming and blaming victims - implying, for example, that women who dress in a certain way and are then raped are partially responsible for being raped, or that exposed female flesh justifies sexual aggression - are absolutely tied up in the normalization and trivialization of sexual violence.

On the subject of intoxication: I think we can agree there's a big difference between consent given after a couple of beers or glasses of wine and "consent" given when the person is so thoroughly intoxicated their judgment is severely impaired.  Obviously there's a grey area here, which is why this is a very difficult topic and why courts wrestle with these decisions.  There really aren't easy answers here, but I think it behooves sex educators to stress that if there's significant doubt about whether or not someone is in a fit state of mind to give consent, sex should probably be avoided.

All this said, I do get frustrated with the anti-pornography wing of feminism (as opposed to the sex positive wing - I would consider myself an ardent sex positive feminist) that considers any eroticized depiction of female bodies objectification and any depiction or discussion of rape in art to be glorifying rape and thus contributing to rape culture.  This position annoys me tremendously, and I think it really gives feminism more generally a bad name.

Quote from: Salacious Angel

Quote from: limetomThis is a sensitive topic and I suggest people tread lightly. Before you hit "post", please walk away from your computer and think about whether or not what you have to say is really worth it.

Do my posts sound heated? If so, I apologise. I was in fact enjoying this conversation. My words are succinct in the interest of economy and so may seem blunt.

To be clear, that was me talking as an administrator to everyone, not just to you.

Quote from: Salacious Angel

Quote from: limetomThe term "rape culture" does not have a universally agreed upon definition.

I shan't fight a ghost. It means one thing at least for the sake of argument or it doesn't mean anything.

It seems that every one else involved in the discussion aside from yourself (or at least that's the sense I've gotten from your posts) uses the broader version I included--where rape culture includes all kinds of sexual violence by people of any sex/gender perpetrated against any other kind of person, not just penetrative rape. Perhaps we should go with that since there seems to be consensus at least here?

Quote from: Salacious AngelI believe I have clarified my reasons for disagreeing with the thesis of the Cracked article and with the Seraphine's specific comment in the tavern.

All I ever saw--and maybe I missed something--was that because it mentioned "rape culture", the article was untrustworthy and useless. I don't think that's a very good reason.

Quote from: Salacious AngelI have no positive contribution to make to a "feminist perspective on videogames", as feminism (insofar as it is an unambiguous and identifiable thing; see above) is inimical to my worldview.

I don't plain get this. What do you mean?

Quote from: Salacious Angel
After a brief rumination I realise one thing that's been disconcerting me greatly is the big fat finger pointed squarely at me in the title. This conversation isn't about me and I'll sleep better without my name attributed to it.

There are ways of fixing that. :)

Quote from: limetomIt seems that every one else involved in the discussion aside from yourself (or at least that's the sense I've gotten from your posts) uses the broader version I included--where rape culture includes all kinds of sexual violence by people of any sex/gender perpetrated against any other kind of person, not just penetrative rape. Perhaps we should go with that since there seems to be consensus at least here?

No, because it doesn't end there. Vreeg's definition slides to incorporate sending sexual pictures without consent, for instance. That's are not what I am talking about. This is a fundamental, irreconcilable point of departure and defines the limits of my possible contribution to this conversation. As long as you use that word we are not talking about the same thing. You are welcome to determine an explicit consensus of rape culture's definition and stop using that word. Until then there is no consensu for me to join.

If you think I'm being a pedant, that's fine. I am a pedant.

Quote from: Seraphine Harmonium"Rape Culture" may be a new term but it definitely describes a real tendency in American society to endorse socially acceptable forms of rape, such as getting a girl drunk, as well as attitudes like "slut-shaming" and victim blaming.  These things aren't just made up by feminazis.

Seraphine's tavern post is explicitly what I am disagreeing with. I assert, in response, that American society does not find "getting a girl drunk" or "slut shaming" or "victim blaming" socially acceptable. I also disagree with a great deal of what has subsequently been posted but I'm being careful not to exceed my grasp.

Quote from: limetomAll I ever saw--and maybe I missed something--was that because it mentioned "rape culture", the article was untrustworthy and useless. I don't think that's a very good reason.

You are absolutely right. Mea culpa. I will address that soon.

Quote from: limetomI don't plain get this. What do you mean?

I don't know what you don't get. I reject feminism with my every fiber physical, intellectual, moral fiber. I don't and won't discuss anything from its perspective except to ridicule it.

EDIT: On the other hand, I can talk about feminism with perfect civility.

Quote from: Salacious Angel

Quote from: limetomI don't plain get this. What do you mean?

I don't know what you don't get. I reject feminism with my every fiber physical, intellectual, moral fiber. I don't and won't discuss anything from its perspective except to ridicule it.

EDIT: On the other hand, I can talk about feminism with perfect civility.

No, I got that bit. What I mean here is: why do you reject it?

I'm curious too.  Feminism means a lot of different things.  The kind of feminism I embrace, for example, is the egalitarian gender-studies type that's all about deconstructing gender boundaries, interrogating essentialist assumptions, emancipating sexual minorities, and exploring the performative nature of gender.  I consider myself a feminist insofar as I believe in equal rights for men and women, an end to double standards, in sexual liberation, and in laws and policies that give both men and women control over their bodies and choices.  I subscribe to a form of feminism that goes hand in hand with men's liberation and, really, champions an end to proscriptive gender roles altogether.  In other words the form of feminism I align myself with isn't just about women - far, far from it (kind of exactly the opposite).

This is all very, very different, of course, from lots and lots of other brands of feminism, some of which I have no time for at all - like the ugly female-chauvinism of the SCUM manifesto or the strident conservatism (and flat-out prudishness) of anti-pornography feminism.

Quote from: Salacious AngelI assert, in response, that American society does not find "getting a girl drunk" or "slut shaming" or "victim blaming" socially acceptable.

Some people obviously don't find it socially acceptable.  Many in conservative circles - often those doing the slut-shaming and victim-blaming - do.  American society isn't one thing.  Feminism isn't one thing.  Culture isn't one thing.  It's all a complicated mess of intersecting, contradictory, conflicting tendencies and opinions.  But I don't think it's really possible to contend that:

a) slut-shaming doesn't happen
b) there is no connection between slut-shaming and sexual violence
c) no one ever contends that slut-shaming is acceptable

There are people who consider slut-shaming acceptable (or who deny slut-shaming even while they're doing it), and this acceptance is frequently informed by aspects of their culture (often of the conservative, patriarchal Christian variety, for example).

Quote from: Salacious AngelEndorsing/socially acceptable/forms of rape/such as getting a girl drunk. This assumes the following, working backwards:

•That getting a girl drunk is a form of rape. This may be true legally speaking - I cannot speak to the follies of American jurisprudence. It is not, actually rape. It can be morally objectionable, even reprehensible, but it isn't rape. Rape is a specific kind of thing and I reject the continuing efforts to soften its definition.


•That this behaviour is socially acceptable. I grant that many (I will not grant the majority) of young men I once associated with would feel no compunctions against plying a woman with alcohol. I do not, however, know many who were not similarly inebriated at the time. Even if they were sober and intending to intoxicate the woman, she retains her agency and responsibilities as an adult. Even granting your point for the sake of argument, it nevertheless remains that "socially acceptable" means two totally different things depending on the moral status of the first point. It is either socially acceptable rape or socially acceptable not-rape. This makes all the difference in the world.


•That American society tends to endorse this behaviour. Endorsement and acceptance are not the same thing, so it is important to separate these two points. I'll assume you did not mean that society "puts forward", "publicly approves" or "supports" these behaviours, whether they constitute rape or not. If you did, well... we don't merely live on different continents, but different planets.

It seems, upon rereading, and going over later posts, all well written, that one of the definitional issues is the Level of Measurement we are using.  It sounds like one of the problems is some people are looking for ratio answers and some are looking for ordinal ones.  I go back to this in a attempt to understand the conversation better.
I can't help but agree in most ways about the, "plying a person with alcohol", though there are still levels of it.  Does a person retain completely their agency when the amount of alcohol is much larger than she expects, if a drink uses a type of vodka that is 120 proof instead of 80 proof, or Devil's Spring 160 proof?  If there is deception involved, how does that change things?  It is sill under the definition of 'plying',.. only more so.

Moreover, I do not see the term 'socially acceptable' as black and white, or I think we have something of a false dilemma here.  Something can be, in my view, opinion, and experience, More socially acceptable than something else, and as such, defeats any attempt to make it an ordinal definition.  Culture is large, and as a large mass, naturally gives itself to levels of acceptance.  
To use an earlier example, why does the high level of rape in the military exist?  Other factors mitigate to make admitting this and dealing with it as a cultural group more difficult, but this can be viewed as rape is more acceptable in a military setting.  Not acceptable, that is certain.  But more acceptable?  Obviously, as the cultural society goes to great lengths to bury it.
I'm sure there will be more later.

Also, as I am going out, I shall try to be succinct, but the issues with this are not merely western.  India, Egypt, and many others are dealing with the same things, at different levels.   I see this as a global issue.

 

Quote from: SteerpikeI'm curious too.  Feminism means a lot of different things.

I'll keep beating this dead horse until candy falls out. If it "means a lot of different things" it means nothing to me.

QuoteI subscribe to a form of feminism that goes hand in hand with men's liberation and, really, champions an end to proscriptive gender roles altogether.  In other words the form of feminism I align myself with isn't just about women - far, far from it (kind of exactly the opposite).

What you are describing is not feminism, but egalitarianism or humanism. I agree with the content of this paragraph, but you don't get to append -ism to a sex-specific noun and call it egalitarian. Every significant egalitarian argument professed by feminism predates the feminist movement. I can be everything that is good about feminism and not be a feminist. To call myself a feminist because your particular flavour of feminism has much in common with my own nameless philosophy would be to endorse the misapproriation of humanity's most valuable intellectual treasures.

I won't actually explain my antagonism to the movement. That project is too big and too ugly. It is sufficient to justify my disavowal of it. Insofar as it is useful and true, it bears a deceptive moniker.

ALSO: Vreeg, when you are sober and I can understand what you are saying (like in your last post), you are pretty damned persuasive.

Quote from: Salacious AngelWhat you are describing is not feminism, but egalitarianism or humanism. I agree with the content of this paragraph, but you don't get to append -ism to a sex-specific noun and call it egalitarian. Every significant egalitarian argument professed by feminism predates the feminist movement. I can be everything that is good about feminism and not be a feminist. To call myself a feminist because your particular flavour of feminism has much in common with my own nameless philosophy would be to endorse the misapproriation of humanity's most valuable intellectual treasures.

Well, this is fair enough, but you should realize that (1) many feminists these days really are egalitarians, and absolutely see feminism as fully compatible with and indeed intertwined with egalitarianism, and (2) by taking a hard-line stance against all feminism on a semantic/definitional basis (on the basis of what the movement calls itself as opposed to what it stands for), you're risking a lot of misunderstandings.

Insofar as feminism makes constructive claims it is indistinguishable from its predecessors. Unless you can describe a positive argument which feminism contributes to social discourse that independent humanist reasoning cannot and has not, feminism is at best indistinguishable from egalitarianism. In the absence of such unique and constructive contributions, and given the more pernicious forms of feminism whose existence you acknowledge, feminism's distinguishing elements are at best neutral, and potentially destructive.

So what good does feminism do? Not egalitarian feminists. Feminism.

Quote from: SteerpikeSome people obviously don't find it socially acceptable.  Many in conservative circles - often those doing the slut-shaming and victim-blaming - do.

I am attacking the monolith, which is trivially easy to do. I in no way dispute your accusation with regard to this or that subculture. If American society is not a monolith, I don't need to argue the point at all.

Quotea) slut-shaming doesn't happen
b) there is no connection between slut-shaming and sexual violence
c) no one ever contends that slut-shaming is acceptable

I am not saying any of this (I'm not saying that you're saying that I'm saying this either). I'd be surprised if anyone on this thread disagreed with you here.

QuoteThere are people who consider slut-shaming acceptable (or who deny slut-shaming even while they're doing it), and this acceptance is frequently informed by aspects of their culture (often of the conservative, patriarchal Christian variety, for example).

That they exist at all is not in dispute.

Cool, I think you're probably on the same page with people here more than you (or they) think you are, and the argument was mostly over terms and labels.

Personally, I never think of cultures in terms of monoliths.

Quote from: Salacious AngelInsofar as feminism makes constructive claims it is indistinguishable from its predecessors. Unless you can describe a positive argument which feminism contributes to social discourse that independent humanist reasoning cannot and has not, feminism is at best indistinguishable from egalitarianism. In the absence of such unique and constructive contributions, and given the more pernicious forms of feminism whose existence you acknowledge, feminism's distinguishing elements are at best neutral, and potentially destructive.

So what good does feminism do? Not egalitarian feminists. Feminism.

Well, I can name many scholars and scholarly works associated with feminist theory that I think do very important work.  And I wouldn't consider feminism wholly distinct from "independent humanist reasoning."  But this debate is, perhaps, outside the boundaries of this thread...

Quote from: SteerpikeCool, I think you're probably on the same page with people here more than you (or they) think you are, and the argument was mostly over terms and labels.

Here's all my cards on the table: I am deliberately, unequivocally disputing feminist terminology as loading the discourse and as having an ethos in actual conflict with humanist thought. If you are saying you're a "humanist with a funny hat", fine. But you share your name with a sociopolitical lunatic fringe while purporting to be unlike them. What makes you unlike them yet still sufficiently "feminist-which-is-more-than-simply-humanist" to warrant the label?

These labels are not trivial distinctions. They disguise deeper problems.

Your issue is with branding and your refusal to even discuss the Male Centric, Male Dominated, Female Dis-empowering world in which we live is, frankly, disheartening. You are falling into a trap, a trap designed by the political elite who do not want to discuss this issue in any meaningful way. They want you to get hung up on words, rather than the greater issues. They want you to expend all of your effort debating semantics because by the time you finally get around to the real issues, either your opinion will be so hardened that you can easily be labeled an extremist or you will grow so weary of the fight that you bow out entirely.

Quote from: Salacious AngelHere's all my cards on the table: I am deliberately, unequivocally disputing feminist terminology as loading the discourse and as having an ethos in actual conflict with humanist thought. If you are saying you're a "humanist with a funny hat", fine. But you share your name with a sociopolitical lunatic fringe while purporting to be unlike them. What makes you unlike them yet still sufficiently "feminist-which-is-more-than-simply-humanist" to warrant the label?

Should we tar an entire intellectual and critical condition with one brush on the grounds of its "lunatic fringe"?  Especially one that's had such a positive impact on the lives of so many (the movement generally, not its fringe)?

For me, I see feminism as a movement that began as an activist and intellectual struggle for women's rights in the face of descrimination and institionalized sexism, and which has since grown into a complex branch of discourse that intersects with dozens of other branches: humanism, marxism, liberalism, socialism, egalitarianism, all of these things and more.

Perhaps it's just because I'm relatively well-versed in different currents in academia and discourse, I dunno.  I've never seen feminism as one thing - or liberalism, or humanism, or anarchism or marxism or consveratism or any other -ism.  There are lots of different versions of these things, iterations of these things.  They represent distinct viewpoints, and those who work within them have individual viewpoints more distinct still.  There are lots of struggles and contradictions and contentions within every "-ism" on the planet.

I do understand that the term is loaded, perhaps unfortunately.  Perhaps it's time the term changed - perhaps it's outlived its usefullness (or perhaps it was never a good term to begin with).  I just don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, I guess.

EDIT: It would be nice if our discourse was rationally laid out and labeled and neatly categorized and terms always fit the ideas within them properly.  But that's just not the reality of how the interchange of ideas works, IMO.  This is just the regrettable reality of how discourse functions and grows.

Quote from: Elemental_elfYou are falling into a trap, a trap designed by the political elite who do not want to discuss this issue in any meaningful way.

Let's assume we each possess sufficient agency to argue the merits of positions as we best understand them. My thoughts are my own, as your thoughts are yours. I have not been socially engineered.

Quote from: Elemental_ElfYour issue is with branding and your refusal to even discuss the Male Centric, Male Dominated, Female Dis-empowering world in which we live is, frankly, disheartening.

I do deny that we live in a Male Centric, Male Dominated, Female Dis-empowering world. I am absolutely willing to discuss this, but no-one has actually raised this argument (the concept of rape culture might be related, but it is not the same). I am not willing to take any of your above assertions as given.

Quote from: SteerpikeShould we tar an entire intellectual and critical condition with one brush on the grounds of its "lunatic fringe"?

That is neither what I am doing nor what I am asking to be done.

(http://s7.postimg.org/nmb7dlyjb/Venn.jpg) (http://postimg.org/image/nmb7dlyjb/)

If you claim membership within a movement yet profess no beliefs that are distinctly that movement's own (in whatever variation), then by what metric are you actually a member of that movement? Feminism is both multiordinal and multivalent. To the extent that someone claims to hold beliefs within feminism's exclusive remit, I need to know what distinguishes them from other beliefs within feminism's remit. Otherwise we cannot discuss a coherent "feminist perspective".

This is the heart of the problem. You say we are "probably on the same page" because we both agree to the elements of feminism which are not unique to it. If this was all feminism actually was, feminism as a collection of overlapping but otherwise distinct and intelligible philosophies would not exist.

EDIT: this naturally does not prevent you all from discussing this topic among yourselves. I'll remain an enthusiastic spectator even if the subject proceeds from premises which I dispute.

Quote from: Salacious Angel

Quote from: Elemental_elfYou are falling into a trap, a trap designed by the political elite who do not want to discuss this issue in any meaningful way.

Let's assume we each possess sufficient agency to argue the merits of positions as we best understand them. My thoughts are my own, as your thoughts are yours. I have not been socially engineered.

We are all products of social engineering. If you were born into a different society, you would not be who you are right now.

Quote from: Salacious Angel

Quote from: Elemental_ElfYour issue is with branding and your refusal to even discuss the Male Centric, Male Dominated, Female Dis-empowering world in which we live is, frankly, disheartening.

I do deny that we live in a Male Centric, Male Dominated, Female Dis-empowering world. I am absolutely willing to discuss this, but no-one has actually raised this argument (the concept of rape culture might be related, but it is not the same). I am not willing to take any of your above assertions as given.

Except you weren't on the first page.

QuoteAgain, chauvinism, not rape. I'm not talking about what I'm not talking about.

If you have changed your opinion, then let us delve into it.

1 in 5 women in this country are likely to be raped.

Women still earn less than their male peers.

Women who are raped in the military routinely see their rapists get off scot-free.

What percentage of politicians are female? What percentage of top 500 companies' CEOs are female?

Prior to Healthcare Reform, women who were raped in the past and then raped again in the present were routinely denied Rape Kits and Psychological help because it was considered a pre-existing condition.

Many politicians still push laws that force women who become pregnant after being raped to carry their child to term.

Quote from: SAI do deny that we live in a Male Centric, Male Dominated, Female Dis-empowering world. I am absolutely willing to discuss this, but no-one has actually raised this argument (the concept of rape culture might be related, but it is not the same). I am not willing to take any of your above assertions as given.

Oh, bosh and bullshit.

Quote from: LVIt has been mentioned but not specifically declared that the term 'Rape Culture', as it is used in current conversation, is a subset of Chauvinism.  It has been suggested that they are different, and this is correct; this is a Venn Diagram where the one (Rape Culture) is nearly totally inside the other (Chauvinism), but where one does not equal the other.  Making this distinction helps, I think. 
This particular Venn subset exists within others, and understanding this also is useful.

I pretty much said earlier that they are not the same but oner is a subset of the other.   This HAS been gone over and the post attached was related and expanded.  There is much that is going to be messy and less than perfect, but this is one area that was at least gone into heavily earlier.


Going deeper into the term feminist, which, as might have been read before, I grew up with heavily, I see as clearly as anyone that much of the argument and underlying thought ignores history and biology, and frankly goes over the top looking for a reckoning and a resolution that would be no more 'equal' than the one that should be replaced.

However, my feelings on the best forms of feminism is that they look for common ground and conversation, and value, as I do, personhood above gender identity or sexuality.  As I have a child, a boy now 5 (yes, Nom, he is five now, V is 5), my goal is to teach him that consent is his goal in all relationships, male or female, that 'No means no' is not enough, he needs to earn an affirmative in any situation that involves sex or relationships.  To understand me better, realize I wrote much of my work in defence of existential psychology, particularly in the school of Rollo May.  I see much of the more extreme versions of Feminism as immature formats, unaware of how they fit into the full context of existence, but at Feminism's core is a very humanistic attempt to place the agency of the person above the role created by the cultural aggregate.

Quote from: CrackedBut as soon as the guy turns up, she dissolves into tears and nursing. She could be machetifying a rapist cannibal into sashimi, but if the hero arrives she'll instantly collapse into helpless tears, safe in his arms. Because that's exactly what happens.

I do not think the person who wrote this has actually played The Last of Us. Ellie's behaviour makes complete sense in context.

Quote from: Cracked[referring to Bioshock] But if the woman can already rip holes in reality and/or enemy sternums, maybe they should have a character dynamic other than "Save me!"

Bioshock Infinite is badly written to the point of narrative incoherence. Besides which, Booker doesn't end up saving Elizabeth at all. She ends up drowning him in order to close the loop on an ontological paradox.

Both Bioshock Infinite and The Last of Us can just as easily be read as treatises on failed fatherhood and the impotence of traditional masculinity. Joel saves Ellie even though her sacrifice might save humankind. He doesn't do it because he's a Big Damn Hero; the loss of his first daughter twenty years ago was almost more than he could bear and he wasn't about to forsake his newfound surrogate. These stories are as much about human weakness as human strength. Neither vindicates the male protagonist's use of violence. Neither triumphs the abrogation of female autonomy (it just so happens that Bioshock infinite is also a nonsensical narrative mess).

Quote from: Elemental_ElfWe are all products of social engineering. If you were born into a different society, you would not be who you are right now.

Shall we both then disregard each other as talking heads? Of course not. We'll each speak our piece in respect and good faith.

Quote from: VreegOh, bosh and bullshit.

Umm. Or not.

What specifically is bosh and bullshit?

Quote from: Elemental_ElfExcept you weren't on the first page.

I can maintain everything I stated on the first page while denying what you just wrote. If I acknowledge the existence of a phenomenon but deny its being representative of some greater institutional force, then I am not acknowledging the existence of that greater force. I am being consistent in this.

Quote1 in 5 women in this country are likely to be raped.

Without comparable non-penetrative female-initiated rape statistics (again, explicitly identified as rape), that figure is not reflective of an actual disparity. The statistics are incomplete and cannot by themselves represent female disempowerment.

QuoteWomen still earn less than their male peers.

Not when you account for degrees of training and experience, sick leave and maternity leave. You invoked this statistic (which it isn't even), so if you want stats, show me yours (with sources) and I'll show you mine.

QuoteWomen who are raped in the military routinely see their rapists get off scot-free.

I'll take your word for it.

QuoteWhat percentage of politicians are female? What percentage of top 500 companies' CEOs are female?

This is not automatically evidence of discrimination. It might be evidence of different interests, different aspirations, different but equally negative expectations of both men and women, masculine competitiveness or ruthlessness... I'm not saying it's about any of these things. Or none of them. If you make the positive claim that this disparity is in any sense evidence of a "Male Centric, Male Dominated, Female Dis-empowering world", you must also exclude alternative explanations.

QuotePrior to Healthcare Reform, women who were raped in the past and then raped again in the present were routinely denied Rape Kits and Psychological help because it was considered a pre-existing condition.

Many politicians still push laws that force women who become pregnant after being raped to carry their child to term.

Neither of these are statistics. You aren't even saying that the laws have gone through (which would be something). I cannot do anything with this information.

And Vreeg, I know full well that you discussed Venn diagrams before. I invoked them in order to address a specific point regarding a request for one unambiguous feminist philosophy. I am not interested in "best forms".  If "at Feminism's core is a very humanistic attempt to place the agency of the person above the role created by the cultural aggregate", you still have not described something both positive and unique to feminism.

Quote from: Salacious Angel

Quote from: Elemental_ElfExcept you weren't on the first page.

I can maintain everything I stated on the first page while denying what you just wrote. If I acknowledge the existence of a phenomenon but deny its being representative of some greater institutional force, then I am not acknowledging the existence of that greater force. I am being consistent in this.

From my perspective, you are all over the place and shifting what you want to talk about. You deny and disregard much of what everyone else is saying, disavow all their statistics while providing none of your own to counter. It's always easier to defend than it is to attack.

Quote from: Salacious Angel

Quote1 in 5 women in this country are likely to be raped.

Without comparable non-penetrative female-initiated rape statistics (again, explicitly identified as rape), that figure is not reflective of an actual disparity. The statistics are incomplete and cannot by themselves represent female disempowerment.

From Rainn: "9 of every 10 rape victims were female in 2003.

About 3% of American men — or 1 in 33 — have experienced an attempted or completed rape in their lifetime.1

   In 2003, 1 in every ten rape victims were male.
   2.78 million men in the U.S. have been victims of sexual assault or rape."

Quote from: Salacious Angel

QuoteWomen still earn less than their male peers.

Not when you account for degrees of training and experience, sick leave and maternity leave. You invoked this statistic (which it isn't even), so if you want stats, show me yours (with sources) and I'll show you mine.

Considering I have given you plenty of statistics, I feel disinclined to do the leg work.

Quote from: Salacious Angel

QuoteWomen who are raped in the military routinely see their rapists get off scot-free.

I'll take your word for it.

"According to a 2011 Newsweek report, women are more likely to be assaulted by a fellow soldier than killed in combat. In 2010, according to the Department of Defense's Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office there were 3,158 military sexual assaults reported, however the Pentagon's statistics say that that represents just 13.5 percent of the estimated 19,000 assaults that actually occurred that year.[11] During that period, only 575 of the cases were processed. Of the cases processed, only 96 went to court-martial.[1] Another investigation found that only one in five females and one in 15 males in the United States Air Force would report having been sexually assaulted by service members.[2]"

Quote from: Salacious Angel

QuoteWhat percentage of politicians are female? What percentage of top 500 companies' CEOs are female?

This is not automatically evidence of discrimination. It might be evidence of different interests, different aspirations, different but equally negative expectations of both men and women, masculine competitiveness or ruthlessness... I'm not saying it's about any of these things. Or none of them. If you make the positive claim that this disparity is in any sense evidence of a "Male Centric, Male Dominated, Female Dis-empowering world", you must also exclude alternative explanations.

Traditional gender roles are an insidious form of discrimination.

Quote from: Salacious Angel

QuotePrior to Healthcare Reform, women who were raped in the past and then raped again in the present were routinely denied Rape Kits and Psychological help because it was considered a pre-existing condition.

Many politicians still push laws that force women who become pregnant after being raped to carry their child to term.

Neither of these are statistics. You aren't even saying that the laws have gone through (which would be something). I cannot do anything with this information.

Let's do the reverse: Prove to me that we are not a sexist society. Prove to me that the Rape Culture isn't true.

I got the part about the Venn, I caught the later use.  Your comment was that "(the concept of rape culture might be related, but it is not the same)", and that no-one had raised it.
I did not merely discuss the diagram but specifically raised the idea that there was a relationship between Rape culture and chauvinism.  Much of the post dealt with the relationship between them.  I do not claim to be perfect or that more dicussion was needed, but please, do not pretend that no one had made the connection.

And claiming to be interested in and requiring, 'one unambiguous feminist philosophy', (italics yours) is like claiming one unambiguous existential philosophy.   Do you know the difference between 'Equity Feminism' and 'Gender Feminism"?  That by most psychologists, Feminism is considered to be a collection of movements, not a single clear ideal or philosophy, more defined by the end of promoting equality in social and societal roles beyond gender?  I find your request to be somewhat illogical in that there are many competing groups and philosophies within the movement, something you know full well before you made the request.

Quote from: SANot when you account for degrees of training and experience, sick leave and maternity leave. You invoked this statistic (which it isn't even), so if you want stats, show me yours (with sources) and I'll show you mine.

Yes, when you control stats like training, experience, et al, women still make less than men. (http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2013/08/gender_pay_gap_the_familiar_line_that_women_make_77_cents_to_every_man_s.html)  It seems true in almost all cases that the statistics are magnified still, there is a difference, especially after time, when equal experience and other causes are factored out.  but almost all 'studies' into equal pay count on women entering certain careers as a main reason for the inequity and do not bring in the realities of failed gender integration (http://www.iwpr.org/publications/fall-2010/separate-and-not-equal-gender-segregation-in-the-labor-market-and-the-gender-wage-gap) in the workforce.  Studies continually mention this as an issue, but to do consider it part of the problem.

Bed for me.  Thak you all, especially SA for the good conversation.

Quote from: Elemental_ElfFrom my perspective, you are all over the place and shifting what you want to talk about. You deny and disregard much of what everyone else is saying, disavow all their statistics while providing none of your own to counter. It's always easier to defend than it is to attack.

I disagree with much of what has been said on this thread and have explained in the clearest possible terms why I believe such claims are flawed or unsupported. I acknowledge and understand that this might give an evasive impression. If my earnest declaration to the contrary is insufficient there is little else I can do.

I will summarise and consolidate my position as soon as I have some time to pause and take stock of everything that's been said so far. There are numerous trains of thought to process if I am to give each of your points full consideration.

QuoteFrom Rainn: "9 of every 10 rape victims were female in 2003.

About 3% of American men — or 1 in 33 — have experienced an attempted or completed rape in their lifetime.1

   In 2003, 1 in every ten rape victims were male.
   2.78 million men in the U.S. have been victims of sexual assault or rape."

Also from Rainn (http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-victims):

Quote from: RAINNRape, as defined by the NCVS, is forced sexual intercourse. Forced sexual intercourse means vaginal, oral, or anal penetration by offender(s). This category includes incidents where the penetration is from a foreign object such as a bottle.

As you can see this still excludes envelopment. It is therefore still incomplete and not indicative of disparity.

QuoteConsidering I have given you plenty of statistics, I feel disinclined to do the leg work.

Statistics include figures. The few you have provided fall within the onesided rape-as-penetration rationale of the National Crime Victimization Survey. I am willing to grant your position on rape in the military prima facie (see below).

Quote"According to a 2011 Newsweek report, women are more likely to be assaulted by a fellow soldier than killed in combat. In 2010, according to the Department of Defense's Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office there were 3,158 military sexual assaults reported, however the Pentagon's statistics say that that represents just 13.5 percent of the estimated 19,000 assaults that actually occurred that year.[11] During that period, only 575 of the cases were processed. Of the cases processed, only 96 went to court-martial.[1] Another investigation found that only one in five females and one in 15 males in the United States Air Force would report having been sexually assaulted by service members.[2]"

No, I mean I seriously take your word for it. I'm not being cheeky.

QuoteTraditional gender roles are an insidious form of discrimination.

They most definitely are.

QuoteLet's do the reverse: Prove to me that we are not a sexist society. Prove to me that the Rape Culture isn't true.

You are making positive claims and I am asking you to substantiate them. I don't have to provide counterproofs to claims which imply statistics but provide none.

Quote from: Vreegdo not pretend that no one had made the connection.

I won't. I said:

Quote from: Salacious AngelI do deny that we live in a Male Centric, Male Dominated, Female Dis-empowering world. I am absolutely willing to discuss this, but no-one has actually raised this argument.

Had anyone argued, prior to that point, that "we live in a Male Centric, Male Dominated, Female Dis-empowering world"? Specifically?

Quote from: Vreegclaiming to be interested in and requiring, 'one unambiguous feminist philosophy', (italics yours) is like claiming one unambiguous existential philosophy

I'm asking for one of an indefinite number of feminist philosophies. Not "the one, irrefutable ur-philosophy". Any one will do. It can be your personal feminist stance. The point is that when you speak in general I cannot discern any specific ethos. It is, indeed, impossible to dissect in aggregate the multiplicity of feminism's dissenting perspectives. We must speak instead about a feminist philosophy.

We can still grant that feminism in absolute terms is not similarly irreducible.

QuoteYes, when you control stats like training, experience, et al, women still make less than men.

Kudos for the link, Vreeg. I've only given it a once-over (busy day! I've posted a whole helluva lot in the last 24 hours) but if its reporting is sound I might have to revise my opinion.

I'm bowing out of this conversation for a little while. I actually came here to work on SAGE and y'all done distracted me. (Not that I mind) Post away and I'll get back to you when I can.

ALSO: I'm going to finish my rebuttal of the Cracked article, which as limetom correctly pointed out, I haven't actually done. In the meantime, if any of you want me to address any specific points regarding my own position on the subject of a "Male Centric, Male Dominated, Female Dis-empowering world" (like, "how the hell can you deny that?!?!"), speak up and I'll discuss them as well.

Okay, guys, I'm pulling the plug on this thread.

There are several reasons. First, this thread was supposed to be for discussing the portrayal of women and video games based off of this article from Cracked (http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-sexist-video-game-problems-even-bigger-than-breasts/). It has since devolved into absolutely pointless bickering over terminology. While there are certainly very meaningful things to be said about this topic, and, especially how it relates to tabletop games as well, considering our that these are the main part of our site. While we ordinarily have no problem with threads straying from their intended topic, I think it's quite obvious that with sensitive issues like the ones discussed here, constraining ourselves might be a good idea.

Second, it violates the Code of Conduct (http://www.thecbg.org/index.php/topic,22560.0.html). We normally don't even bring it up that we have one, but we do. From the get go because of this alone I was considering banning it, but for a while the discussion actually seemed to be a discussion. Now it is quite clear that it is not a discussion.

Third, I was approached by several people that the thread made them uncomfortable, as it did not represent what we usually do here at the site. Though we're not in the business of censoring much here, especially in light of the first two points, all of this together has made me--as one of the site's admins--decided that it was time to pull the plug on this thread.

Keep in mind, though, this is not a complete prohibition on these kinds of discussions in the future. I think there certainly is room here (and it is important in general) to talk, civilly, about the portrayal of women (and any other group, for that matter) in tabletop games, as well as how it relates to people who are players and GMs of such games.

Feel free to PM me with any questions, comments, or concerns.