Sex Symbols - A Female Character Increase

[the grim lizard]

Perhaps I'm misinterpreting something you're saying, then. So let's try to start over. You seem to have spoken in favor of rigidly defined gender roles for men and women. Some men and women are unhappy with the idea of being stuck in their own predefined gender role, or perhaps either gender role. Examples are a woman who has dreams of prospering in a given career regardless of the fact that it is probably a male-dominated field, or a man who would prefer the quiet life of a homemaker to a hardworking job which would give him fame and fortune. What is your opinion about these people?

Read my really long edit about my personal stance on all of this.

Also, @Phyvo, I think that's very true. I even mentioned how women are more inclined toward touch.

 

[Wyvern]

Sorry, I missed the edit.

Okay, so here's what I'm seeing. Lots men are perfectly happy being in the masculine gender role. Good for them, I was never trying to say there was anything wrong with that. Likewise, lots of women are happy in the feminine gender role, and that's fine for them too. Lots of men and women are not happy in their gender roles and choose to rebel against them. I think that's great for them, and you don't seem to have a big problem with it either.

But that's not the whole story.

What happens to people that are unhappy in their gender role, but are too shy or afraid to act against the social pressures pushing them into a life that makes them unhappy? What about people who exhibit those feelings at an early age but have them crushed down by their parents or peers? They might not be the majority, but they exist. They're people too, and current social trends make it very difficult for them to ever find happiness in life.

If you really believe that most men and women do have innate predispositions towards stereotypical masculine and feminine roles respectively (and maybe they do; I don't exactly have hard evidence saying that it's blatantly false, even though my personal opinions differ), then why does society need to start pushing people into those roles so early? If young boys and girls were raised together, equally, then by your logic, most of them would choose the "correct", natural role on their own, nobody would be forced into a life that's not right for them as individuals, and the world would keep on turnin'. Hopelessly idealistic, perhaps, but I think it's something worth working towards, and fighting for, to help the people in that second category. Who knows, maybe it turns out to be bigger than you think.

So why start forcing little kids into the "correct" gender roles so early? It's unnecessary for the people who would choose the "correct" gender roles on their own, and hurts everyone else for no benefit.

 

[the grim lizard]

What happens to people that are unhappy in their gender role, but are too shy or afraid to act against the social pressures pushing them into a life that makes them unhappy? What about people who exhibit those feelings at an early age but have them crushed down by their parents or peers? They might not be the majority, but they exist. They're people too, and current social trends make it very difficult for them to ever find happiness in life.

Actually, unfortunately, anymore it's becoming the other way around. Women are encouraged to work; men are encouraged to be feminine. I'm not saying either one of those is bad, but society nowadays is pushing it against how it should be. To clarify what I'm saying, it would be like we had a whole class of really advanced students, and one student was way behind. So, to correct it, they make everyone stay behind and slow everyone down. Wow... I hope that didn't sound offensive. Don't read too much into that analogy.


As a general response to the rest...I don't think that is true with the oppression. Most people don't' realize how many lies we are fed daily in recent times. We get so much propaganda to make us believe that we are being oppressed in a number of ways, and it's really corrupting everything. It would be far too involved to spend an adequate amount of time on this. To sum it up, it's all an attack on the family. The media/society is trying to break it down. And it's working. We're buying into these political correctness shams. Instead of allowing a girl who wishes to pursue a career to do something else or to be accepting of a boy who is into fashion or some other traditionally feminine activity...we take it to the extreme and we all but force women who want to be stay-at-home moms to go into the job field and force boys into a gay lifestyle that they would not have chosen on their own. [On a side note, don't think I'm making this up. This happened to a relative of mine.]

As I said, I'm all about diversity. But anymore, it seems like, in order to avoid criticism of being bigoted or whathaveyou, we go to the other extreme which is just as bad if not far worse. What we don't understand is that someone can deviate from a stereotype and still fit a gender role. Men and women aren't equal, indeed no one is equal to another. But, my entire point was that...aside from career choices and all that, men are men and women are women. Men should lead. Women should be adored. Men should be chivalrous toward women, always. All of those types of things are what I endorse. And to try to wrap this up, no matter if it is a man who is working a job or a woman who is a homemaker or whatever the situation, the most important thing on each of their priority lists should always be the family.

(I hope I didn't ramble too much. I was trying to make my point and gather my thoughts, but this stuff is sometimes hard to convey.)

 

[Pyroloserkid]

LMFAO.
This is all I have to say:
"WHOO! CAPTAIN FALCON! TAKE IT OFF!"

It's a good thing my girlfriend doesn't read my posts.


Edit: Now to get ON topic, I agree that Nintendo could possibly be adding "Good Looking" female characters to attract a greater audience. Call it shallow, but we all have to admit that sex sells.

 

[DonkeySmasher]

first of all grim your right this is really hard to put in words

however i will simply say that i agree with grim's differences are there argument and wvveryn's noone should be forced into a lifestyle standpoint

what i'm saying is that in every group there will always be a majority and a minority

we should acknowledge that generally women will act like most women and ditto to men

but this fact must not make us shame those who are different

however we must not force the majority to become the minority so the minority feels good

in short any method of persuading people to choose any lifestyle is wrong

our moral obbligation is not to give special treatment (bad or good) to either group

and grim i also agree with you that family is top priority but what defines family

i live in san Francisco so i've seen my fair share of divorced, lesbian, gay, reverse gender roles, single, and deeply traditional families

and trust me a family is defined by the morals and values a parent teaches a child not by what and who there parents are

 

[the grim lizard]

This will be short.

To clarify, when I said society is attacking the family, I meant the traditional family. They are encouraging the broken families, like you listed off there. When I said family is most important, I was mostly referring again to traditional families where there is a father and a mother (which is how it should be ideally). Anyway, though, families can be different things and you can't always choose your circumstances; so whatever that equates to for you, make that priority.

Edit: To all the guys out here, though...if you want to be successful in life, and you want to avoid brokenness in your home, I'll repeat what my dance teacher tells us every time: "Be a man."

 

[Wyvern]

EDIT: This was meant to be a reply to The Grim Lizard's post immediately after my previous one. The forums ate this post as I tried to submit it and the order got all screwed up.

I suppose I can sort of see where you're coming from. An example that I can relate to is how some people take feminism so far that it wraps all the way around to misandrism, which isn't exactly helpful either. I think this is the kind of example you were trying to make earlier, which I probably misinterpreted. I'm probably guilty of doing this sort of thing sometimes too...it's easy to do when you're one of the people who doesn't fit into their normal gender role. But that's why I fight for a society when everyone is exposed to the full array of options life has to offer without anyone trying to push them into one or another without their consent.

Here's the way I see it. Fifty thousand years ago, when the human race was still budding as a species, people had to be ready to do whatever had to be done to ensure they would have food for the next day. They had to find a way to reproduce fast enough to keep up with a harsh environment killing their offspring. Maybe back then, we really did need gender roles to increase our odds of surviving as a species. But back then, people were too worried about surviving another day to be concerned with art, or culture, or living happy and fulfilling lives.

The world isn't like that anymore. We don't need to scrape together every advantage we can get just to stay alive. Now, survival is practically a guarantee, not a privilege for the most devoted. And now that we don't need to worry about just living, we instead worry about being happy and fulfilled. My personal opinion is that rigid and wholly separate gender roles is more of an obsolete habit we picked up from our ancestors than it is a necessity in our modern psyches. I think that if everyone was freed from all social pressures towards and against gender roles, men and women wouldn't be as different as they were two hundred years ago, or as different as they are now. They probably wouldn't be identical to one another, but there would be more similarities than most people expect...and I don't think that society or the family unit would be thrown into disarray in the process. You happen to disagree, and seem to think that in the absence of all social pressures, people really would revert to the olden days' gender roles and be happy about it.

But even though our predictions on what the perfect world would look like are different, it seems like the path to get there is the same: to leave all options open to everyone, both male and female, and let them choose for themselves without society trying to force them into a certain choice. Everyone would be free to find the life that comes naturally to them and makes them happy. It doesn't matter what the pattern turns out to be, as long as everyone is ready to respect each others' choices (or natures, if you prefer).

Do you understand what I'm trying to say here?

 

[Snakebite]

Let’s just hope that future Smash instalments do not become to full of so called sex symbols as I don’t want to see the game trashed into some Hentai/ typical anime spin off where over exposed girls with sex appeal kick so called arse. Because we all know sex sells, and no matter how bad the game or anime, it will still sell if there’s some sort of female exposure.

Some one pointed out in previous posts that final fantasy X2 soled mainly because of the sex appeal it had too offer.

All I can say, it’s sadly true. I remember debating in regard to the best of the final fantasy series, and you would be surprised to find how many people would judge final fantasy X2 as one of the best, solely based from sex appeal. What else did that game have going for it?

What the hell is happening with the industry and sex appeal, it’s completely dominating everything? This is a separate rant but look at anime and the direction its taking. I almost feel that anime secretly tries to promote child porn, with the countless attempts to re make neon genesis, or be it the typical stereotypical Japanese school girl disguised sex symbol, that are being constantly remade and mixed effortlessly with the countless possible genres. Be it robots, magic, final fantasy and whatever else they can cram sexual symbols into.

It won’t be long until we find sex tapes with exclusive Minda footage posted all over the internet. A lot of present sex symbols scattered through out the game and especially the anime industry are corrupting young minds especially that of young boys

It’s no wonder why people are becoming more sexually active at younger ages. The industry promotes it. I just hope that the next brawl cover does not have some massive picture of Zero Suit Samus On the front of it doing some sort of erotic pose.

Look at every single cover of Guild wars to date, all with a female depicted in one sexual form or another. Judging by the covers you would expect to be playing some sort of exotic fantasy porno or something.

Let’s hope it does not happen with smash.

 

[Wyvern]

Like I said in another post way back when, I don't think that Smash as a whole is going to devolve into some kind of sex romp. Honestly, if it had been anyone other than Samus, I probably wouldn't have noticed it at all (well, I'd have noticed, but I'd have been less apt to make a big deal of it). But Samus has always been kind of the pioneer for female characters who can be successful without relying on sex appeal and the other standard roles expected for the female parts in most stories, and seeing her objectified is a real slap in the face for those of us who respect her as a character.

And for what it's worth, I don't think I've ever heard anyone say anything positive about Final Fantasy X-2. I've never played it myself, though, so I can't say for sure.

 

[tstumo]

this discussuion has alot of intelligence. ive played FF x-2 and yes it's what they relied on. just look at Rikku. in final fantasy X she wasnt as skantily clad until she made it to x-2 where she had her under wear showing. i dont think the Zero suit Samus thing is that bad. Samus is still the girl dressed in armor who people originally thought was a man. sure ithis time around we are more exposed to the feminine side of her and i dont think there is anything wrong with it. I remember when tomb raider came out people made a big deal about her and her two big assets. when in actuality she was like the female version of indiana Jones not some DOA chick that fondles herself after she won a match. I look at it the same way for Samus i guess. this industry does rely on the whole sex sells thing but i dont think nintendo does so much. not in this game either.

 

[MechanizedDeviousFox]

I agree with Wyvern's posts, but I also find some truth in grim's posts. Great stuff, guys. Wish I had something more constructive to say, though.

 

[Takalth]

Grim_lizard, I'm glad to see somebody agree with me about society trying to push people opposite of traditional gender roles and destroy the traditional family. You completely hit the nail on the head with that one. There are reasons we have a ridiculously high divorce rate in modern society, and that's #1.

 

[Circus]

Homosexuality is wrong. If you are one, not to come across mean, but it's because of choices that you make. Now maybe you grew up being told that it was okay, but it was still your choice to be that way. It is NOT genetic!!!!
I don't care how many doctors or scientist say that it is, it is NOT. They make up the theory in their minds, because they feel guilty for certain things and try to hide the wrong things that they do. It is not natural to be like that.
Now if you understand me, the parts don't fit together for a reason. Because they were not intended to be that way. Not trying to preach at ya, but Jesus can deliver you from it if you ask him to. Look at it like this, If -- as certain groups of people are trying to do -- everyone becomes gay or lesbian, the world will essentially kill itself off because their will be no more kids. Not a good thing if you ask me.

I know this post was skipped over for a reason — it has nothing to do with the topic. Regardless, it's driving me nuts that it's just sitting here, and I feel the need to respond do it. So here I go! *skidoos into the post*

You're whole argument is based on your own unfounded opinion, or at least an opinion that someone else told you that you decided to accept as your own. You say things like they're facts, or as though you personally know the way someone else's thought process works. You don't. And I'm actually insulted that you think you do.

"Homosexuality is wrong. If you are one, not to come across mean, but it's because of choices that you make. Now maybe you grew up being told that it was okay, but it was still your choice to be that way. It is NOT genetic!!!!"

The origin of homosexuality is unknown. A gene has not been found for sexual orientation, but that doesn't confirm anything about it being a choice. You could ask 100 gay people if they chose to be gay and I can almost guarantee you that not a single one of them will say anything other than "I didn't". And why should you take their word for it? Because they have first hand experience with it.

"I don't care how many doctors or scientist say that it is, it is NOT."

So you're saying that if an established doctor were to show you evidence disproving your claim, you wouldn't believe him or her because you just inherently know it's a choice? That's interesting, because I think if a doctor told you your liver was failing, you wouldn't have trouble believing it.

"They make up the theory in their minds, because they feel guilty for certain things and try to hide the wrong things that they do."

Again, back to that whole you-can't-read-minds thing.

"It is not natural to be like that. Now if you understand me, the parts don't fit together for a reason. Because they were not intended to be that way."

A ***** isn't technically meant to fit in a mouth either. But even straight people still do it. Lots, actually. And it's not natural to die your hair, get cosmetic surgery, or use glasses or contact lenses to improve your vision either. But we do all that too.

"If -- as certain groups of people are trying to do -- everyone becomes gay or lesbian, the world will essentially kill itself off because their will be no more kids. Not a good thing if you ask me."

What certain groups of people are you talking about here? Show me one "group" who's purpose is to recruit more gay people. If you can choose your sexual orientation, as you say, then let's all take a moment right now to choose to be straight and stop the human race from dying out........Okay, good. Glad we avoided that crisis.

Whew. As for the actual topic at hand, Grim Lizard and Wyvern have basically covered....everything. And have brought up a lot of points that I hadn't thought of that I find myself agreeing with (mostly with Wyvern, to be frank).

(Did anyone catch my Blue's Clues reference? I'm pretty proud of it)

 

[h1roshi]

the c.falcon one had me LOL'ing. sexy indeed...peace

-hiroshi

 

[N1TE/2L8]

This smash bros. chat needs a little more smash bros.

 

[RBinator]

A topic focused on the sex appeal of females somehow didn't get out of hand? Serious? Every other topic I seen around here that even remotely said anything about female characters got caught up in sex appeal so much and led to flame wars, even more so if said character wasn't human. Somehow this topic ends up being one of the most mature (behavior-wise), even if the past few pages had basically nothing to do with Smash and became about role models. There's not all that much for me to say since many points have been brought up.

I don't see how Brawl can even remotely close become anything like oh I don't know, just about every other fighter out there. Zamus is pretty tame compared to the female fighters you see in just about every other fighter out there. Samus has always kinda been a sex symbol due to the somewhat dressed states she would appear in for finishing the game fast. While I won't deny that Zamus most likely could have gotten in due to sex appeal (which again, I think is pretty tame), I guess they were being somewhat realistic in what she would wear under the suit. I don't think it would work to wear loose fitting clothes like jeans under the suit, so she ends up wearing something tight to not hinder her abilities. I have no doubt that a same would happen for a male character with a suit like that, mainly because the whole "oh noes! Sex symbol!" factor would have been missing.

I don't think they could ever turn a male character into a sex symbol if they tried. Now I'm aware that there are people out there who do see characters like Link and Captain Falcon as such, but for the most part, it wouldn't work. If females really are as horny as males, I don't see them express it remotely the same way as guys, which may or may not be a result of society. I seriously wonder if even lesbians feel anywhere near the same as most horny male teenagers.

The joys of double standards, don't even know where to begin. Have we not seen a bunch of handsome or well built guys in media? Now I understand they don't tend to get marketed based on that fact, but I still wonder how people who complain about how women are treated as sex objects somehow ignore just how unlikely it would be for a guy to look like the many we see in the media. Again, I'm aware that men are not pushed into such a thing.

I think the main reason why it's a lot more common for female sex symbols in video games is because the graphics gotten better and the standards are not as strict as they used to be. The sex factor in video games tends to be tame compared to what movies been doing for quite a long time now, at least in America. Should only be a matter of time where we get games that Japan has had for many years now.

Sometimes I feel like the "OMG sexy women are bad!" group of people are acting very immature about the whole thing. I even seen female character suggestions shot down because of fear of said character becoming more popular and thus more fan art of them being sexual in one way or another. Why does this stuff matter to people so much that they want to control everyone else? You usually have to look for it and if you only check out fan art on sites that are very strict about sexual content, you likely won't find anything worse then what you may see in official art. The point is, sexual art exists even if a character is unpopular.

 

[Xanderous]

****ing Furries are not hot.

 

[N1TE/2L8]

I wish IC had come up more in this discussion, Nana (assuming she is a girl) has no sex appeal at all.

 

[Smooth Criminal]

...wow. I honestly thought this thread was going nowhere until Grim and Wyvern upped the ante. Wonderfully illustrated all around, guys (if a bit tangential to the original topic. Lol).

Y'know, I'd like to sum up each party's respective views into one tiny little vignette that comes from a song:

Living so free is a tragedy

When you can't be what you wanna see

Living so free is a tragedy

When you can't see what you need to see.

Powerman 5000, "Free."

It's true.

Society is a tyrannical (but necessary) ******* that dictates human behavior. It forces our worst traits to the forefront, creating a monster that thrives off of hubris and selfishness. We're all affected by the paradigm-blanket that it casts; unless you are one of those afflicted with an incurable madness that leaves you totally lost to reality or you're isolated on the moon, you have been assimilated. There's no escaping it. Day in and day out, you are bombarded with a bajillion different concepts and ideas, a bajillion different ways to live your life.

People are like an artisan's clay; they are impressionable creatures from birth, able to be shaped and molded into something. The hands that do all of the work, of course, are all of the viewpoints and ideas that you are forced to deal with. It starts when you're young. Bit by bit, these come in and start creating something that isn't exactly singular, but rather a conglomeration of many parts to a whole. As you grow older, though, some immutable portents begin to emerge and a sense of "self" emerges as your awareness of the world around you expands. In an odd and ironic sense of duality, however, your perception of the world narrows as well. In some cases, the same thing is given to you in such heavy. heavy that things seem simpler when viewed through that particular avenue; in other cases, you may be lacking and compensating for something. Some of the ideas that you held on to lose their luster and you start warming up to other ones that you have been consistently exposed to.

Soon, it's do or die. This is when society (or certain parts of society) step in to judge what it has wrought. Fortunately, you have several different directions to go here. You can even choose to walk away from it all, if you like. Regardless, it's tricky to do. Whatever path you choose, it is tainted by an idea that underlines your decision like a contradiction. There's nothing original and individualistic about the decision you've made; if anything, it's like one big bloody cliche. You fall in place somewhere, even if you don't intend to, and have to conform to a particular statute of standards.

But that's okay. That's life.

Scary, huh? Like man doesn't even have a say in the matter and their destinies are forever governed. In a way, what I've described resembles a universal truth. It may seem cold and pessimistic, it's not meant to be. Remember, life is still what you make of it. Though you have those hands constantly prying at you, influencing you in ways too subtle to imagine, there are attributes that are inalienable. You have the ability to choose to walk down whatever path of life you want. Our greatest gift is this ability to choose, even if it is watered down by external factors like politics and religion.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that is impossible to escape the nuances of a civilization, as we are all destined to espouse some small portion of it one way or the other. Conversely, you have the power to change your mind and find a niche that you are satisfied with. I don't agree with the ****ing circumstances of peers thrusting others into a role that they don't wanna be in. People should find a place in society that they are happy with and not forced into it. Girls should not have to be sexy, masculine, or anything else; guys shouldn't have to be prissy, feminine, or what have you. They should be able to choose what they're able to be.

Sadly, true "freedom" does not exist in this day and age, nor any of the others. Sure, you are essentially free to walk down whatever path you want---but too many things get in your way. That's why I posted the chorus to that song.

...holy cow. Did I write all of that ****?

Ah, well. Please do not misconstrue me as some mindless automaton. It's simply an outtake on life that I wanted to share with you guys.

Smooth Criminal

Edit: Aw, ****. I missed the "homosexuality" post. Oh, well---I think Circus provided input that was much similar to mine. The only difference would've been me being a bit harsher. Eloquently said, man.

 

[RBinator]

****ing Furries are not hot.

O rly?

But really, why can't all the discussion about female characters for Brawl not turn into a huge flame war over sex appeal (I'm looking at you Krystal thread)? With all the stuff going on for Brawl, who is seriously gonna buy the game just to play as Zamus for sex appeal? What are the odds of some random John (No Johns ) picking up the game solely because Zamus was on the cover (if that happens) while knowing nothing else about it? As much as I admire the female form, it won't blind me to the fact that if a game sucked, it would still suck.

I'm aware of a certain special post in this topic, but like most others, I chose not to reply to it (yet) just to avoid an out all brawl flame war. I guess that's gonna happen and one of the best topics that I believed handled such an issue like this (sex appeal) will likely be locked and then we're be back at square one with the massively amount of n00bish-ness surrounding it.

On another note, I remember typing up a long essay on Nsider forums about the subject matter surrounding Zamus.

 

[LaniusShrike]

Yeah... this thread really has been brilliantly eloquent and diverse, all around. Even opinions people would largely disagree with have been said, which I think is healthy enough for a balanced discussion. Even if seeing "homosexuality is wrong" posts makes me die a little inside.

Took a feminism class last year in college, and I think that was actually a very interesting/unique experience that did change the way I analyzed things, especially societal related topics. I think taking a course such as that is good for hardening what you do and don't believe in with regards to morality. The class itself probably made me want to distance myself from feminism as a titled belief system, since the teacher was a completely sexist psycho who in no way deserved to represent feminism... but still.
Good sort of class to consider taking.

Huge props to everyone who is taking their time to express themselves.

 

[OnyxVulpine]

I haven't been able to say something in this thread for a few pages because I don't even understand what some of you are going at.

It's just to much for my young weak little mide to handle..

 

[LaniusShrike]

I haven't been able to say something in this thread for a few pages because I don't even understand what some of you are going at.

It's just to much for my young weak little mide to handle..

Heh. In a nutshell... things aren't really that fair in the world. Society expects different things for different genders, but it's very difficult to promote change.
And I guess there are other opinions, like "Zamus is sexy" and "homosexuality is wrong" and "Midna is sexy"/"No she's not"/"Yes she is, watch the end of TP!"
... but mostly, the big long posts are about society and it's strong grip on our way of life.

 

[the grim lizard]

...

Since I was gone, and I don't really care to go on any more point-by-point responses, I'll just give a quick reply to this...

The sexual orientation gene is known. It's the 23rd pair of chromosomes.

Also, flame mario-man all you want, but you don't seem to have any first-hand knowledge about this either. Well, I do because I have a family member who has gone through it. And what he says is true: It's a choice. Although, not quite that simple. Social pressures, drugs, and other issues forced this person into that lifestyle. So, in that sense, it wasn't a "choice," but it certainly wasn't anything they were born with. So choice in the sense that it wasn't inherent? Yes. Choice in the sense that they consciously chose to go down that path? No.

...

I think we both agree that people should be allowed to have their choices without being hindered by sterotypes. Which...yeah, fine.

I think your synopsis is a little off-base, though, but not totally out of line with how society thinks. Basically, all that crap about "it used to be important but it's not anymore" is just that. Crap. We as a human race are no different than we were thousands of years ago, at least at the most fundamental levels. Women are still the ones giving birth and are still hecka lot better at nurturing children than men will ever be. Things like that will never change.

But too avoid going too far down that path, I'll just say this: I don't ever want men and women to be equal. I don't event want to attempt it. Even while letting them do their own thing, it would be a travesty. I like women; they intrigue me. If women became like men or vice versa...the world would be far too boring. I think diversifying between the sexes is more important than diversifying within the sexes (although both are important) because while endorsing the former doesn't necessarily restrict the later, the reverse will likely never allow for the former.


Edit: Also in reference to a discussion we were having before all of this...try doing a Google image search of "サムス"; it's a lot more tasteful than "Samus."

 

[Phyvo]

<snip>

Here's the way I see it. Fifty thousand years ago, when the human race was still budding as a species, people had to be ready to do whatever had to be done to ensure they would have food for the next day. They had to find a way to reproduce fast enough to keep up with a harsh environment killing their offspring. Maybe back then, we really did need gender roles to increase our odds of surviving as a species. But back then, people were too worried about surviving another day to be concerned with art, or culture, or living happy and fulfilling lives.

<snip>

Do you understand what I'm trying to say here?

Yeah, I do. But, unfortunately for your point of view here, it seems obvious to me that the traditional family is still necessary and these alternates are choking it. You said we invented the traditional family so that we could merely survive. So, the question is, are we still surviving?

Look at Europe, for instance. The populations there are just about all declining at an alarming rate because people just aren't having enough children. The people matching the replacement rate are those whose religious views promote traditional families: Muslims. As a result Muslims are going to be the majority, not because of some kind of militant program, not because they're having 12 kids per couple despite reduced infant mortality, but simply because they follow these traditional gender roles.

The USA itself is hovering just above replacement because of its more traditional and religious character.

Now, I'm not saying that we should overpopulate the planet or anything. What I'm saying is that, without any sort of "Let's decrease our population so that we don't kill the planet" program, something has caused this population decrease. The most obvious thing these countries have in common is their very liberal nature, one which allows all these nontraditional families to exist. Obviously, this hurts the country's ability to sustain itself because, WHATEVER else you say, the traditional family is the only one which can produce children. You need one man, one women, and between the two of them there needs to be enough time to take care of the kids and teach them about the world. Less of these families means fewer kids, which can lead to problems like caring for all the old people who outnumber the younger people.

Anyways, that's my take on it.

 

[Drascin]

Yeah, I do. But, unfortunately for your point of view here, it seems obvious to me that the traditional family is still necessary and these alternates are choking it. You said we invented the traditional family so that we could merely survive. So, the question is, are we still surviving?

Look at Europe, for instance. The populations there are just about all declining at an alarming rate because people just aren't having enough children. The people matching the replacement rate are those whose religious views promote traditional families: Muslims. As a result Muslims are going to be the majority, not because of some kind of militant program, not because they're having 12 kids per couple despite reduced infant mortality, but simply because they follow these traditional gender roles.

Actually, that is, mostly, because of the widespread mentality around here. Here in Spain, at least, for most couples a child seems to be basically a burden, both economically and in available time. And people don't want burdens. There are loads of "traditional families" who refuse to have a kid. And the ones that don't, usually have just one just to "fullfill the view", so to say, since the average person actually can't afford the cost of raising more than one child, even with both working parents. Gay couples and things like that are pretty much just another drop in the bucket. The actual problem is that we need kids, but we don't want to deal with the problems having them causes. Disheartening, but simple.

 

[Takalth]

Drascin, you're mostly right. It's sad that people see kids as a burden, but much of that is a result of abandonment of family values and society pushing against traditional gender roles. What made kids more of a burden? Among the reasons:

1: Divorces and premarital birth. It's a heck of a lot harder to handle your kids as a single mother, even if you're getting a child support check (which many of them do not).

2: The degradation of motherhood: The feminists try to portray stay-at-home mothers as women who are missing their full potential or are slaves to their husbands. Almost all women's magazines push this view, as well. In my experience, the happiest and most fulfilled women I meet are stay at home mothers, but a lot of people try to hide that view.

3: Too much materialism: People nowdays define "making ends meet" as driving new cars, eating at expensive restaurants, taking grand vacations, and other entirely unnecessary expenses. When people attempt to base their happiness on their possessions (which rarely works, BTW) they try to resist more financial burdens.

Now, the reason I said that you're mostly right is because you said that the average person can't afford the cost of raising more than 1 kid. My parents raised 8 kids with one working parent on an income that would have been considered below poverty level with one kid (I looked it up). This of course meant that we had no cable/satellite TV, my parents shared a car for several years, the average total sum of a child's christmas presents (at least from their parents) was $10-$15, and we shared rooms while growing up, but we all loved it. People who don't want kids are missing out on the good things of life.

 

[Phyvo]

[edit] I think Takalth said it better then me, but you all should still read The West and the Rest anyways[/edit]

You bring up a good point, but I think that nontraditional families have a bit more to do with it than that. A married couple is not my idea of a traditional family because it has children, otherwise they're it's just a monogamous boyfriend/girlfriend thing with a promise.

Gender roles are fairly pointless when no children are involved, so people throw them away as you mentioned, and that's where nontraditional families come in. So yeah, you're right, that the assault on gender roles is symptomatic of a much larger societal problem.

I've been reading the book The West and the Rest by Roger Scruton, just finished chapter four. It has a lot to say about what constitutes society, what makes Western society different from others, and the current danger Western society is in. In many ways it also agrees with you, though it focuses a bit more on why people want kids and want to extend society into the future in the first place rather than economics which may prevent a traditional family from sending all their kids to universities.

Societies are very interconnected though, so it's hard to find *this* or *that* which causes *this* or *that* general problem. But having nontraditional families and married couples who don't want (more) children for their own selfish reasons certainly doesn't help, as it decreases the population that is actually reproducing.

 

[HeroOfTime64]

Excuse me, but to the direction of Nothing Rhymes With Circus...

PERCUSS!!!

Main Entry: percuss
Pronunciation: pur-'kus
Function: transitive verb
Etymology: Latin percussus, past participle of percutere
: to tap sharply; especially : to practice percussion on.

Ha. Ha.

 

[the grim lizard]

...really good points...

...more really good points...

Phyvo, you win.

@Takalth, I appreciate your heartfelt post, too. I think people miss this. What most people don't realize is that you can live on a very low income. Yes, children are a burden. What facet of life is not? But the joy outweighs the burden. The other thing is, having more kids, you don't have to hire out as many things...you give chores, and often the older children help raise the younger ones. I think big families are great.

If you want to know the real reason family sizes are decreasing...I could divulge that. (Although I've been trying to avoiding going down this path the whole time.) But it is an entirely separate topic altogether. To quickly summarize, though: There are people who want to decrease the population of the human race.

Excuse me, but to the direction of Nothing Rhymes With Circus...

PERCUSS!!!

Main Entry: percuss
Pronunciation: pur-'kus
Function: transitive verb
Etymology: Latin percussus, past participle of percutere
: to tap sharply; especially : to practice percussion on.

Ha. Ha.

HeroOfTime64, you win, too.

 

[Lemon Drop]

Krystal = Hawt
Peach = Hawt
Samus = Hawt
Zelda = Hawt

Also about playing as a Fat chick, is there even any fat chicks in any Nintendo games?

 

[chansen]

Let's get back on topic...

The scope of this thread has gotten completely out of hand.
thanks for the attempt lemon drop

Being gay is completely different.

This one is about whether or not breasts should boost the sales of brawl or any game for that matter. Also whether or not putting smut in games is kosher and whether or not it degrades the title of "gamer".

I'm also surprised nobody has posted that long of essays. I'll lay it all out right here and now

One of the greatest games ever to grace the fighting genre: Soul Calibur. It's an amazing game with great graphics and a strong stroryline and an already very large fanbase. But there is definitely some hot women but they have good character. For Example:
Talim: http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/3/3f/250px-Talim_sc2.jpg
Shes was used first for a very good example. She is well dressed in all of the games and she is a priestess, the epitome of good. Having sex with her should be the last thing in your mind.

Cassandra and Sophitia:
http://media.g4tv.com/gallery/1340_m.jpg (Cassandra)
http://www.angelfire.com/ca5/SFGang/soulcalibur2/Sophitia3.jpg (Sophtita)
Both characters of the utmost of purity but they are definitely sexy.

Taki: http://www.gamez.nl/upload/819836_610_1158651264139-TakiBabe5.jpg
She definitely got the sex appeal, but she has her own internal struggles and problems. Besides, she's a ruthless assassin she's cut it off before you got it out of your pants.

Sueng Mina:http://virak.free.fr/diary/images/seung_mina.jpg
Another good example of a balanced character that is not loose in any way but still has sex appeal.

Ivy: http://tn3-2.deviantart.com/fs12/300W/i/2006/271/0/3/Ivy_Soul_Calibur_by_reiq.jpg
I definitely wouldn't leave her out of this debate. She is meant to be sexy, sexy and dominant. But she is her own person, pissed off at the world and ready to shred some people up.

Another Perspective: Rival Schools and Darkstalkers.
These are both semi popular games and i wont go in to much detail. but the game has great sexy characters but they have little storyline and are 2 dimensional.
The picture is small but it gives insight.
http://tn3-1.deviantart.com/fs8/300W/i/2005/272/b/8/Rival_Schools_Vs__Darkstalkers_by_diablo2003.jpg


Another Perspective: Quoted from womengamers.com
"You keep saying “Why does she have to have such large breasts anyways?”, but my question to you is “Why not?” Don’t large breasted women deserve to be positive role models too? Don’t they deserve to fight evil and save lives right alongside their smaller chested counterparts?"
QFT
Avery good point in this debate, don't physically gifted women deserve to be our hero too?

Another good article on the topic: www.destructoid.com/pixilated-nudity-part-one

Another Perspective:Final Fantasy
Everyones favorite RPG, but filled with characters and relationships around sex. A few of the following pictures are nsfu, sorta. more like, wow, where'd you find that?
Pics:
Image Pack37.jpg
FF10 013.JPG
careful with these, i couldnt find anything else
but it's true that many nerdy dudes have fantasized about one of the ff girls.


i could go on and on like this or i could prove the point.

THE POINT: Sex sells games, nuff said, but integrity can be involved as well, as long as we appreciate women and how delicate they can be, thats when we can accept sexy characters into our console world.


Side Note: This is my 400th post, id like some feedback on it.

 

[LaniusShrike]

The population in no way needs to increase. If people can remain happy with a decreasing population, then isn't that a good thing? With more people things become harder to organize, jobs become harder to find, poverty level becomes difficult to manage, people have the tendency to become numbers rather than individuals... there are many problems associated with too many people, and very few problems with not enough.
However, yes, in parts of Europe the population's birthrate is less than their death rate, meaning that the population would be decreasing, were there no immigrants. But, since there are, the population isn't dropping (This is all according to my knowledge) but there comes up the issue that England's proportion of English and immigrants is shifting dramatically, which worries many native English.
However, I cannot really see promotion/prohibition of homosexuality necessarily being related to the population issue as much as people say. People think Gay Marriages would hinder childbirth, but I don't think homosexuality is as much of a choice as they'll be like "Whelp, I see that I can't marry my boyfriend, guess I'll just have to turn straight and marry some woman and have children with her!"

Percuss... the accent isn't right. Does it still rhyme if you say CIRcus and perCUSS?

I would say that the reduction in population is largely due to a change in what the worldwide culture views as success. Traditionalists such as Muslims do view success in a continuation of the family through children. Americans and Europeans, in general terms, view success in more materialistic terms. So, yes, you can have eight children on a low income, but many today would view that as a pity since such a life would lack extravagant things to show off. Also, children are such a huge investment, and as even one can be a burden to the materialistic goodies such as being able to go out to eat and view movies and the such, people often feel more than one isn't necessary since they already did the whole child thing and now can move on with their lives, by becoming business men and women etc.

I agree with Takalth mostly. Family itself is being discouraged as it detracts from independence. I think that it's not really the fault of the feminists per se- both men and women are taking marriage as a loss of privileges. Watch any sitcom to view the dolt husbands matched up with the nagging wives. Think about all the jokes you've heard about marriage and the unpleasantness of it all. Things are chaotic right now, and I think people were happier on a whole when they knew what was expected of them and thus had achievable goals. Really... every situation has its pros and cons. I do think independence and choice are wonderful things, however, even if I do also believe it is the leading cause in the huge amount of are world's depression.
Anyway, enough rambling for me now.

 

[the grim lizard]

Yes, let's go to the dumber discussion...0|=| |)3\/\/|);; 23r0 5@/\/\U$ 15 73|-| ]-[077|\|35$!!1111!0|\|37\/\/0011!! y@Y 83\/\/b$!13l13\/3|\|

@qdMbp, it's actually be shown in studies that people in these "poor" third world countries are actually far happier than your "successful" American businessman/woman. Point of proof: suicide rate in America compared to TWCs.

 

[muesli]

My Favourites

1.Samus
2.Lyndis (aka Lyn)
3.Marisa
4.Krystal
5.Peach



muesli

 

[1wingedangel]

Well my favourite females would be:

!.Samus
2.Dark Samus(she's a lady, too)
3.Krystal
4.Sheik
5.Zelda

greets

1wingedangel

 

[LaniusShrike]

Grim: What? I was using "successful" just as how Americans view success... and I was saying it's a bad thing. I guess I wasn't clear enough...
Even though my final sentences were about the depression in these countries. Actually, I kind of think I was fairly clear- countries where the roles of individuals are clear, such as Third World Countries, the individuals are happy as it's much easier to feel fulfilled, while in America and Europe it's much harder to feel satisfied with what we've accomplished because we're told that we want to become CEOs. When we become CEOs, we feel the need to be wealthier CEOs. However, if you know that what must be done, such as caring for the animals or sowing seeds then these are jobs that you know must be done, and they have a definitive ending to them. Thus, a good sense of satisfaction from a solid day's work.

But, rereading my paragraph I guess my views on it weren't clear. Take it all in with a touch of sarcasm- especially about "moving on" to do other things such as business. I think we are agreed on that front... Americans are not happy people. We strive for the "American Dream" which is essentially unattainable. Note: A lot of Americans are all patriotic, but I think the majority of us hate a lot of aspects about America.

As for the actual on-topic video game related things...
Yes, Soul Caliber has attractive women. The whole large-breasted thing isn't a problem in itself, it's the way it's portrayed. Look at concept art of Taki, for instance.
http://www.gamez.nl/upload/819836_610_1158651264139-TakiBabe5.jpg
The whole "large breasted women deserve to save the world too" argument isn't really relevant. The complaints are that the characters aren't there to represent chests of all sizes, they are tasteless fodder for horny fan boys.
Now, Ivy is interesting. I would say that she's tasteless, but at least for her the sexual aspect makes sense. That's who she is. I just dislike seeing things when every single female is sexualized, regardless of personality (or when all female characters only have personalities that would get sexualized).
All in all, I think the surface arguments about Soul Caliber not being strongly sexist are kind of silly. Every single female character is strongly, strongly sexualized... and I feel it gets worse with every game they make. The only reason Talim isn't trying to flash everyone with a short skirt or low shirt is because they want some character to be cute, and as a whole people find pedophilia a little creepy.

Final Fantasy, on the whole, is very tasteful I think with its female characters. They portray a wide array of female personalities, and I can't really think of any females that seem like they're just there for eye candy. I can't see your images, but... does final fantasy really have many things revolving around sex? I can't think of anytime ANY of the characters had sex or even had it implied.

@1wingedangel: Dark Samus... wouldn't that be an It? Dark Samus is an incarnation of Metroid Prime, yeah? And the metroids reproduce asexually. Wikipedia even mentions that DS' skeleton is specifically set to match the suit's figure, even so its right arm is a tube shaped area instead of a normal forearm and hand.
So... she's ain't no lady

 

[the grim lizard]

I wasn't necessarily agreeing or disagreeing with your statements, qdMbp, just adding my two cents to it.

and, oh yeah...y@Y 83\/\/b$!13l13\/3|\|

 

[Vali]

Well firstly Dark Samus is the Metroid Prime, and so very much not a lady, more a "thing". Secondly, the entire point of this thread is the negative impact of stereotyping and sex symbols being pandered to in games and not "Who do I think is the hottest?" but oh well.

Edit: @Mewtwomaster

Eek it's late, my brain thinks one thing and my hands type another ;( Either way I wouldn't include it on a list of female sex symbols.

 

[MewtwoMaster2002]

Dark Samus is not Mother Brain -_-'. Dark Samus is Metroid Prime inside of the suit.