Orb Candy, Diablo 3, and Sending a Message

At first GGG should add some very cheap (like 10 points) or even free custom UI without naked women to the item shop. Then they should think about what to do next.

By the way, selling user interfaces is nice business idea, just look at Valve's DOTA2. Profit for GGG guaranteed. :)

"

Ganrao wrote:

Nothing noteworthy has happened in this thread. The responses I have gotten were both at Reddit and both said this was "being looked into". The first of those was 10 months ago. That is a long time to "look into" something. All I can believe at this point is no one at GGG really cares.

Ok, thanks.
I'm currently considering whether or not it's worth it to write some long post about the problem I have with this, including various answers and rebuttal to the usual responses. Maybe I'll wait until this thread is locked so I can post as OP and get many people to read my post.

"

DrunkardCain wrote:

"

Simaimch wrote:

Proof?!

As a few examples: The Afterglow of Construct Accessibility: The Behavioral Consequences of Priming Men to View Women as Sexual Objects, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022103185710220[/i]

I won't pay money just to see your "proof". In the first case I can't judge their model, can't judge their method and can't judge their findings. And "subsequently", "supportive" and "sex discriminatory behavior" aren't very precise.

"

DrunkardCain wrote:

The effects of mass media exposure on acceptance of violence against women, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0092656681900404

Two hundred seventy-one male and female students
Not representive. Next!

"

DrunkardCain wrote:

Images of women in advertisements: Effects on attitudes related to sexual aggression http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01544216

Male and female white middle-class university students
Again: not representive.

Also: is a survey really the right method to measure ones attitude?

"

DrunkardCain wrote:

Searching google scholar for sexism turns up large amounts of papers like these.

I hope there are better (and more important: free!) ones. But I won't do your task to search for proof for your point.

"

DrunkardCain wrote:

Sexism does not need to be "active" in the same way as violence; holding sexist opinions (for example, the sort of sexist opinions which would cause you to comment on a message board that you "like seeing women in chains") is essentially different from being violent, at least to the extent that subjects can be primed for the former and not for the latter.

You haven't convinced me that that's the case. But lets, just for fun, say you were right. I still wouldn't see the problem then. In private women don't have to be around men who treat them like objects. And at their job there is law protecting them against haressment and discrimination.

Also some of your studies include objectification that is not related to sexual violence. And I'd say that it's safe to assume that nearly every healthy male watches porn. Should that be forbidden next, only to make sure no nasty men can think a woman is a sex-object?

"

DrunkardCain wrote:

If you really believe that men cannot (or should not) be allowed to be offended by things which happen to be offensive to women, then again... I am at a loss.

I don't say that you can't be offended as a man. I only say that you are a hypocrite if you are. Women have equal rights all over the western world and are treated with a great deal of respect. But most important they have their own voice and can stand up for their own interests. You think you're doing them some kind of favour for fighting their fight but in reality you are just silently assuming that they are not strong enough to do this. This makes you the biggest sexist.

"

DrunkardCain wrote:

Prove that the design elements of the UI are art.

Prove the opposite. There isn't a central committee which decides what's art and what's not. Everyone can have his own opinion about hat.

"

ciniasty1 wrote:

At first GGG should add some very cheap (like 10 points) or even free custom UI without naked women to the item shop. Then they should think about what to do next.

By the way, selling user interfaces is nice business idea, just look at Valve's DOTA2. Profit for GGG guaranteed. :)

Making people pay not to be offended is even worse than the current situation and I guarantee you no one who has a problem with the statues as is would give GGG a cent for that.

Considering I know several female players, none of which found the chained women on the UI offensive and I asked them about it after reading this to make sure, I find your point kind of sad. I personally didn't view them as sex slaves or sexualization of women, and more of an artistic while visually appealing representation of the fact you are exiled against your will and how your life and survival is chained to those very orbs that show your life and mana. People who see nothing but sexualization everywhere make me weep for society, you see something and immediately assume sex and objectation. Now, some comapanies do sexualize female characters and that does bother me, however I do not believe GGG had in anyway done so other than in the minds of those who can not see artistic value and assume it is all sex. I personally like what to me is quite a symbolic image with those two women chained to the orbs which ultimately control you life and ability to defend it.

As for the fact that the women are nearly naked, yes that is true but considering the scene and setting of the game I would not expect a prisoner, male nor female, to be fully clothed in the world which Path of Exile exists in. Infact I find even the cloth around them to be a sign of how pitiful such an imprisonment would be in that world. Now if say they were displayed in a less subdued manner I might take offense to it, but they aren't. They are simply visually appealing artistic allegory for what those orbs can mean to you and the situation which your character is in.

If you analyze the two women you can see the one over your life appears to be shielding the orb, protecting it, which is something you as a player must do, guard your life. While the woman chained to your mana looks to be fighting against her bonds, representing how you use your mana to fight against your exile and imprisonment on Wraeclast. Your life to guard, and your mana to fight. Really those who women who you are objectifying and saying are being degraded are actually showing quite admirable strength once you really look at them as more than some sexual fantasy.

Maybe those that see them as sexualization might need to ask their partner to maybe experiment some fantasies you are having without realizing or admitting to yourself? It is no shame to have some little secret desire, but please keep your fetish to yourselves and stop assuming a woman in chains means she is instantly a sex slave.

"

Ganrao wrote:

Making people pay not to be offended is even worse than the current situation and I guarantee you no one who has a problem with the statues as is would give GGG a cent for that.

Freedom of speech trumps your politically correct, feminist, leftist "right to not be offended".

By far.

EDIT — Acid and fire for the troll who likes to argue on the internet: http://puu.sh/5ubbN.png

"

markus7 wrote:

Freedom of speech

You know what freedom of speech is not? It is not a license to oppress others with your shitty sexist rhetoric and "art". They have a right to enjoy games just like you do and not feel unwelcome doing so in a massive free to play like this.

Lots of shitposters like yourself have spouted off about freedom of speech, and I hate to break it to you, but you don't actually give a shit about anyone's free speech but your own.

"

Ganrao wrote:

"

markus7 wrote:

Freedom of speech

You know what freedom of speech is not? It is not the right to oppress others with your shitty sexist rhetoric and "art". They have a right to enjoy games just like you do and not feel unwelcome doing so in a massive free to play like this.

Lots of shitposters like yourself have spouted off about freedom of speech, and I hate to break it to you, but you don't actually give a shit about anyone's free speech but your own.

Do people have a right to enjoy games?

If voilence makes me feel bad do I have a right to have all violence removed from games?

If puzzles in games make me feel stupid do I have a right to remove puzzles from all games?

If a person who lost a limb is less capable in game, and that makes me feel less capable in real life do I have a right for that character to be the star?

You have a lot of rights. You have the right to complain about things you don't like. You have the right to vote with your money. You have the right to avoid things that you have unpleasant.

You do not have to right to have everything that offends you changed. You do not have the right to decide what is art and what is not for other people.

My wife, who has a Bachelor of Youth Work and is trained to see the stuff you are talking about..

Agrees wholeheartedly with the perceptive individual who noted that the figure hugging (protecting) the health globe represents "heart" and the figure on the right represents "soul", since the heart protects and the soul fights.
Her PCism is much more concerned with the glowing red penis in act 3 than the chains on the figures. Those chains, btw, are her only issue.
She does admit, however, that changing the two figures to male make them non-offensive and thus doing so would anti-femininist.
She called seeing the two figures as sex slaves "a stretch, especially since you cannot gauge their facial expressions which would tell a lot"

I will add that to create equality (feminism) one of the figures could be made male.

She took a look at the depiction of female characters and was quite impressed by the lack of lara-croftness and totally reasonable body shapes and facial features. It is clear from this that GGG has taken the female role modelling quite seriously and approached it in a mature manner.



Recall, also, that Atlas is chained and forced to hold up the world. Given that Atlas is chained, is he also a sex slave? Obviously not, imo, so the mere presence of chains cannot determine ones status of sex-slavery.

B.

ps, this stuff is called "answering a question"

"

Ganrao wrote:

"

rareness wrote:

This is quite saddening because, for some reason, you actually believe the shit you fling like an uncivilized monkey towards anybody who dares even come within view. But still, you've piqued my interest and I have to ask the question - what makes you think that the UI is, in any way, shape or form, depicting the chained females as "sex slaves" or, rather, misogynistic?

Well, faced with such a civilized query I suppose it is my duty to respond. My honor as a gentlemen demands nothing less. Certainly, the noble and correct thing to do is indulge you with a quality answer that satisfies beyond question.

This response is right up there with using "I owe you an apology" instead of actually apologising.

B.