Dirty Tats: shocker, but lowbrow game marketing is lowbrow

Discuss

119 Responses to “Dirty Tats: shocker, but lowbrow game marketing is lowbrow”

  1. simonbarsinister says:

    Hawley: “Oh sorry, I thought blogs were written with needles in permanent ink on skin. That’s how I read BoingBoing, on a friend’s skin, updated daily. My mistake.”

  2. Brainspore says:

    …WTF, it’s time to grow up, put on the big boy pants and realize that 50% of the population are not just here for your entertainment.

    Not 50% of the population, just the ones who shove their boobies in front of cameras for money. (Lord bless ‘em.)

  3. sworm says:

    @87: No. I’m arguing that it cuts both ways.

  4. sworm says:

    Using breasts to sell a game is misogynist.

    However, assuming that men will buy a game because of breasts isn’t sexist?

    Double standards old school feminism. Isn’t it about time that we get past this idea that it’s men who constantly try to keep women down?

    Feminism is about freeing everyone, regardless of gender, from stereotypes that limit them.

  5. ZDepthCharge says:

    Next you’ll be saying that for men to view a woman’s tattoo is a thought crime. What is wrong with this for real? Just because you choose to scrawl “I Hate Women” on this fake person’s breasts makes the people that built the app mysogynistic?
    What if it had been a man? Would that have made this app a crime against men?

  6. robulus says:

    @Airpillo,

    OK so to summarise, because the promotion didn’t actually write the words Marisa wrote you don’t accept that it is hateful, but because Marisa did write the words “obviously sex starved” you are happy to characterise her comments as openly hateful, resulting in an explosion of hypocrisy that is causing you great distress.

    You have very delicate sensibilities.

  7. Metlin says:

    @ #56 (FREEYOURCRT)

    Thank you.

  8. MIOnline says:

    Firstly, I have to say that the tattoo is crass and in poor taste.

    That said, I must say that if anything, misandry (hatred of men) is more prevalent than misogyny
    in Western nations in the last few decades.

    Also, it is men and boys who are less safe in Western nations – the death rate from murder is roughly three times higher for men than women.

    Sexism cuts both ways, and neither misandry nor misogyny is cool.

  9. robulus says:

    @Sworm, well this post is about an instance of sexism against women, so how do your comments relate to the topic?

  10. octopod says:

    @Robulus

    thanks for the mini-review, will try the demo.

    (not into bendy lead guitars thing much, but don’t have anythng against creative typography, or arcade-y gameplay)

    the sad thing is, I would hope, this whole thing is marketing + exteral design company fail, and there’s probably some poor sob’s in the coding and art department who are just as pissed.

    but, boo-hoo.

  11. Anonymous says:

    I’m Marisa who wrote the original post and I just want to thank you all for the giggles with these comments.

    I wrote the post in five minutes not intending it to spark a debate on sexism, racism, darwinism, dwarvism …

    I blog on tattoos daily, and daily, I read about “tramp stamps” “ass antlers” “bulls eyes” … tons of labels put on tattooed women and so I wanted to have a little fun throwing it back at the Codemasters who did this game.

    That said, I think Xeni is spot on in saying:

    “Do I think this is a crime and should be banned and is destroying our childrens? No.

    Is much of gaming culture shitty to women? duh.

    Do I, as a woman, think it’s excellent material to poke fun at? Yeah.”

    And even though it was not intended, I am glad it sparked some discourse, and hopefully, through these discussions, gaming culture and related advertising will evolve.

    Oh, and I have no problem with tattooed boobies. In fact, I celebrate them! [I wrote a regular column for Suicide Girls and write regularly on burlesque performers and pin-ups.] I think they’re beautiful.

    This game, however, is ugly.

  12. nutbastard says:

    to the same end, are pictures of womens feet misogynist, because they dont show the whole woman?

    what about hands, and elbows?

    after all, it’s only the traditional patriarchal society that’s made breasts into extremities of sexual interest. it’s only society demanding that they be covered that makes them in any way tantalizing when they are less-than-covered.

    if anything, breasts have been covered too long, and the only way to rectify the oppression of our forefathers is for women everywhere to start going topless and showing more and more of their breasts on a regular basis, so that they are no longer treated as objects of sexual nature, and are instead viewed as just another body part of a human.

  13. nutbastard says:

    oh and xeni, apologies, i just noticed that it wasn’t you who wrote the post, it was marisa, and so any digs at you are actually digs at her.

  14. sandoz says:

    Haha.. Just a disclaimer, I’ve worked for the studio this was made in.

    Hey Boing Boing, love your site. Why don’t you post something a little more your style… maybe about the suicide girls!

  15. sworm says:

    Two statements:

    1)Men think about sex every five seconds.

    2)Women think about getting married every five seconds.

    Almost everyone will find the first statement less offensive. Some will even claim it’s true. Which is sad, you’d think we had advanced a bit since the 60s.

  16. Anonymous says:

    “What’s wrong with being sexy?” – Nigel Tufnel

  17. Calcularius says:

    nc gn, Xn hs sd th ‘wndrfl thngs’ st (f y dn’t lk m qtng t, tk t ff yr hdr) fr prsnl btch-fst gnst smthng sh fnds bhrnt t hr wn qstnbl tsts.  Sh’s lk n f ths ppl wh cnstntly scks ll f th nrgy t f th rm wth thr ngtvty, xcpt hr, t hppns n blg frm.

    ’m sr f y srch hrd ngh, Xn, y cn fnd bt 6 mlln thr thngs tht cs n qlly twt-pnchng-pnty-bnch-p (MG, ws tht msgyny???).  Why nt pt thm ll n bngbng?  Myb tmrrw y cn pst sm pctrs f nfntcd!

     

  18. Anonymous says:

    Tattoo art is generally regarded as lowbrow. Not necessarily in the strict sense, but generally.

  19. AirPillo says:

    Hypocrisy, how? There is a difference between perceiving insensitivity which is classified as hate, and knowing you’re doing something hateful and not caring.

    Hurling insults and using sexist stereotypes to decry something because it’s sexist. That isn’t hypocritical?

    Furthermore, if someone has a problem with hate, and they respond with hate, that isn’t hypocritical?

    The only way it is acceptible to respond to this offense with hate is via the same kind of tortured logic of broad justification that prejudiced people use as an excuse to continue their own hate.

    My point is that if doing this was wrong, then responding to it hatefully was just as darn wrong and that both sides of that particular polar relationship should be ashamed of themselves.

    Being insensitive and hateful isn’t only wrong when it’s somebody else doing it. You can’t just make anemic and unjustifiable claims that “they’re bad people, they deserve to be hated!”, especially because nobody has even bothered to discover the identity of those responsible. They don’t even know their gender, for that matter. The entire basis of slandering them is because it feels good and because they assumed things about them based on stereotypes.

    Evolving this further, some people have seen this, taken offense to it, and decided they want to be just like whoever created it, in terms of moral standing.

    What, do people think that as long as the person doing something hateful makes up a convincing excuse tied to a romantic cause like feminism, they’re entitled to voice prejudice from a pedestal?

  20. hoffmanbike says:

    i used the tool to create a nice “pearl necklace” and set it to my desktop background for the evening

  21. Xeni Jardin says:

    Thanks, nutbastard, but you’re still an asshole.

  22. IWood says:

    #9 posted by Calcularius:

    Yeah, I used to bitch about stuff and people all the time on my old blog. ‘Cause it was my blog.

  23. Anonymous says:

    Wow. I am surprised by how surprised I am by the astoundingly poor grasp on the concept of ‘feminism’ most of the commenters here have. It’s happyfun strawfeminist time at Boingboing today!

    My especial favourite is that bit where men really dig telling women what feminism actually is (usually: it’s feminism to let me ogle all the breasts I want, and it’s reverse sexism to call me an arsehole for doing so!). Ah, men. Yes, you are totally the victims, aren’t you? All those nasty feminists implying it’s not very nice of you to objectify women TOTALLY EQUALS, in fact SURPASSES, the daily suffering of women encountering common-as-fuck, evilly banal misogyny every single day of their lives (apart possibly from those days where they don’t leave the house, don’t turn the computer on, and don’t watch the television). You poor little chickens, how can you possibly be expected to cope with the daily travails of someone’s expression of disapproval of your daily headless-lady boob-ogling requirements?

  24. Agies says:

    Hey, this would be the ad that has been running on Offworld for the past week.

  25. robulus says:

    @Airpillo said:

    romantic cause like feminism

    Ooops. Now you’ve done it.

  26. jackalopemonger says:

    @9,

    If you don’t like what’s on, change the channel.

  27. robulus says:

    Yeah I mean when you look at the campaign as a whole, they’ve just gone “15 YEAR OLD BOYS! 15 YEAR OLD BOYS!” and come up with a complete package that is comically stereotypical of marketing to that demographic.

    This little app is really the icing on the cake though, its wrong for so many reasons, and they deserve a kick up the arse.

    Its especially disappointing because the game stands on its merits without needing this kind of crap to promote it.

  28. nutbastard says:

    SO, let’s see if i understand you all correctly: this flash app would be perfectly acceptable if it showed the womans face, as she would not then be a woman reduced only to boobs, but an entire woman, with an identity? and maybe if like, they put a little bio in there with her hopes and aspirations and maybe a story about her dog or something? and if instead of her saying “I like the personal touch” she could launch into a diatribe about fair trade coffee and independent films?

    tell me how we can keep the boob tattoo part by modifying the rest of it and have it not be sexist/misogynist. because if that can’t be done, what’s the point of arguing about how she’s been reduced to only a pair of anonymous tits, if said tits can’t be satisfactorily reconstituted into a whole person? because then it’s the tits themselves that are the issue, if they are a total deal breaker, in which case, argue against the tits, not against the supposed reduction of a whole woman to a pair of boobs.

  29. hokano says:

    hoffmanbike:

    i used the tool to create a nice “pearl necklace” and set it to my desktop background for the evening

    That’s perhaps more than we needed to know. Unless I misunderstand what you mean by “the tool”.

  30. AirPillo says:

    That is the worst example of cherry-picking in this entire discussion.

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      AirPillo,

      First of all, your wounded act is getting old.

      Second, you don’t seem to understand the difference between anger and hatred. Anger is a potent tool for social change. People get angry when they’re treated like cock holsters. The fact that their anger upsets you is your problem, not theirs. When the problem goes away, the anger will go away. Not before.

      Third, you seem to feel that it’s the responsibility of women to educate men about sexism. Or to extrapolate, gay people to teach straight people about homophobia, non-white people to teach white people, etc. Get over it. The last thing that the underdog needs is to shoulder your agenda in addition to the crap that they already put up with.

      Fourth, you seem utterly oblivious to the reality of sexual politics that take place in every country on earth. You made the unbelievably inane comparison of vocal feminism with cross burning. Would you mind just listing for me the countries where husbands are burned to death by their wives for not providing a sufficient dowry? How about the ones where women make more money than men for doing the same job? The ones where men aren’t allowed in public without a female relative accompanying them? Context, AirPillo, you should check it out.

  31. adralien says:

    Really? People are giving Xeni flak for this? WTF, it’s time to grow up, put on the big boy pants and realize that 50% of the population are not just here for your entertainment.

    Keep trying to justify this, it will be entertaining.

  32. Antinous / Moderator says:

    I feel that people who are going to call others out for prejudice or insensitivity have a responsibility to be rational and constructive…

    I’m not going to attempt rational discourse with Beavis and Butthead. If a thirty year-old man insists on acting like a horny thirteen year-old in his view of women, he doesn’t get my respect. You seem to be demanding, not just that you should be able to do what you want (which nobody here disagrees with), but that nobody is allowed to have a negative opinion of you for doing it.

    I honestly think the latter offense is actually doing a lot more harm.

    Given that women have less money, fewer rights and less safety than men in virtually every corner of the globe, your concern for the tender feelings of men seems misguided.

  33. pecoto says:

    Most of the male population and some of the female population likes boobies. They use boobies for advertising….this is hardly new, hardly shocking, and hardly worth mentioning. I guess they should have another game involving a guy’s ass to appeal to the rest of the population…just to be fair??

  34. nutbastard says:

    @#67

    such petty insults are below you, xeni. i may may swagger a bit when exhibiting incredulity and bewilderment at the seemingly unsatisfiable, contradictory and irrational demands of the feminists, but i am interested in having a civilized discussion peppered with a bit of good natured humor.

    you know what a generic insult is? it’s the last resort of an incompetent debater.

    “i have demonstrated that there are possibly huge logical fallacies in your arguments, and eagerly anticipate the manner in which you will address the points i have raised”

    “uh…um… well you see, um….you’re an asshole!”

  35. lizdamnit says:

    Hey Nutbastard – I was moved by your original comment about arousal vs feminism. I’m going to assume it was written in good faith, since it intrigues me.

    First off – I’m just curious, precisely who’s doing the “demonizing” of straight men? I suspect you’re on the receiving end of some sterotypes about some mythic, monolithic, League of Cranky Feminists who get angry over a simple biological reaction that (gasp!) women share.

    Dude, if you’re getting “demonized” for simple arousal, you’re hanging with the wrong people :)

    Second, and probably a bit left of topic, it may be helpful to think of feminists in terms of individuals, a diverse and, yes, complicated swathe of unique views and opinions and wants. Just like non-feminists.

    At its core, the way I understand it, that that all “we” are asking is that the genders look at each other as human beings, not strange and alien critters.

    I’ve left out a lot of what I wanted to address for the sake of brevity, and I’m happy to take up points that may arise after, since this is taking a while to post. So yep. There’s my bit.

  36. octopod says:

    >”15 YEAR OLD BOYS! 15 YEAR OLD BOYS!”

    y, there seems to be a bug in the age comparison logic at the website, there’s a > when there should have been a <=.

    the other sad thing is at places like gdc, there’s so much navel gazing about how can we broaden our appeal, and why aren’t there more women core gamers, even lgbt industry panels and blah blah blah. and this is just, a bit not helping.

  37. Tdawwg says:

    cherry

    Sexist.

    Seriously, you need to quit.

  38. AirPillo says:

    Nutbastard, even I’m not silly enough to not know that this offends women more because women have to put up with it more consistently, frequently, and from infinitely more sources than men ever have.

    Men can live more easily with sexism because it’s experienced sparsely. It is far from the norm. When it’s a constant presence in someone’s face the feeling is far different.

    Jesus, if my telling people to hold themselves to their own standards was somehow going too far imagine how much further you’re going by telling people to basically just “walk it off”.

  39. 2k says:

    Yikes!

    I can’t keep track of the angles running through this. Brain overload!!!
    Temptation. Assasination. Pretty fabulous subversive encouragment. This might just be the most perfectly balanced topic/invitation I’ve ever seen.
    Somewhere, somehow, the tubes are chiming in sympathetic resonance.

  40. Moriarty says:

    Assuming that you personally will be swayed because you are a man is sexist. Guessing that men in general (well, teenage boys at least) will investigate in greater number is pretty well empirically supported, aside from any questions over whether that fact ought to be exploited.

    And yes, this is a particularly humorous example. Woman parts are for oggling, but actual women are scary (less so if they obligingly reduce themselves to parts).

  41. sworm says:

    I have a question:

    Are dildos(sp?) a form of misandry?

  42. Metlin says:

    Wow, seriously?

    This is surreal stuff.

  43. freeyourcrt says:

    @ #26 Meltin

    well said (written)

  44. Ian_McLoud says:

    Thanks for giving this ad some additional publicity! If you hadn’t I might have missed the opportunities to play with these boobies!

    How about a contest for the most original design using this little gem?

  45. kaizer3 says:

    I’ve enjoyed the feminist dialogue. At the core of feminism is a concern for equity and justice. With that in mind let me question a linguistic choice in the post.

    “Kanji” is Japanese for “Chinese Characters,” because one form of written communication in Japan uses Chinese characters. Isn’t calling Chinese characters “Kanji” privileging Japanese culture over the older Chinese culture (btw – I speak of Chinese culture in the larger sense than merely mainland China)? Or is it the cheeky kitsch you seen in ex-pats abroad who refer to Cambodia as “Kampuchea” or call Thailand, “Siam”?

    Or maybe it’s like calling strawberry ice cream, “stuh law bear ee ai suh clee moo”? Cause that’s how they say it in Japan.

    Why not say “Chinese characters”?

  46. nutbastard says:

    and xeni, i realize that you may have taken the ‘breasts have been covered for too long’ paragraph as being sarcastic, or tongue in cheek. it isn’t either, not in the least. i just returned from burning man, where, as i am sure you are aware, many women go topless. it was a little odd at first, rather arousing if i may say so. by day 3, all that was gone. they ceased to be ‘topless women’ and simply were ‘people’.

    isn’t that preferable? isn’t that true equality? when a man raised in this society can ‘get over’ the sexualization of breasts in a mere 2 days, can cease to view topless women as inherently sexual, and simply see them as people?

    to further stress the blurring of the lines, i wore a skirt the entire time. a really pretty skirt. and you know what? i can’t wear that skirt in real life, not without some very unfair consequences and judgements. and that sucks. but at least there aren’t LAWS preventing me from doing so, as there are in most places regarding topless women. and yet, the topless issue is almost non existent in the feminist community. why? my theory: *Because men would like it*. and it seems y’all are more interested in displeasing men than you are in pleasing women.

  47. nutbastard says:

    “There are male equivalents:
    Men resent being seen as ‘walking wallets’.
    They don’t want to be devalued because of the size of either their muscles or their penis.”

    that’s all wussy emo-self-image crap. boohoo someone else thinks my dick is too small, wahhh someone else thinks i’m just here to make money.

    who gives a flying fuck what other people think? the people who would judge men based on such things are obviously superficial and shallow, thus their opinion is worthless, and should not be regarded as being in any way valid.

    i dont go around worrying about how the rest of the world perceives me, because there are opinions i value, and opinions i do not. if some guy i didn’t know attempted to bait me or start some sort of conflict with me, i wouldn’t be affected by that – i dont know this guy, so i can’t vouch for the validity of his opinions.

    pardon the pun, but grow a pair and stop fretting about how you are perceived. there will always be bigots and assholes and people seething with misdirected hatred in the world – get over it. there are (or should be) more important things that your attention and energy can be expended on, and really, since you’re never going to run out of examples of women being marginalized, isn’t it just an excuse to complain futilely, all day every day? again, it’s like complaining about how we keep getting older, or mexican radio stations. no matter how good our medication gets or how many ranchero towers they tear down, one will always age, one will always be able to find a mexican radio station.

    it’s bordering on misanthropy to so vehemently reject parts of the world we live in that are essentially harmless. i know you all feel that it’s NOT harmless, but that’s only because you’re allowing this shit to get to you. like the guy you don’t know talking shit about you, why even give this stuff that upsets you the time of day? why dignify it with a response? it’s going to be gone, by the way, in a few weeks. what’s with arguing against something that has an assured timeline for inevitable self-destruction??

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      but that’s only because you’re allowing this shit to get to you.

      But you only think that because you’re in the privileged group who doesn’t have to deal with the consequences. And because you have no empathy.

  48. hokano says:

    Here at her own blog, Xeni chose to tag this item with:
    ART , FUNNY , GAMES , SEX

    I took that to mean she didn’t take the whole thing quite as seriously as Marisa Kakoulas DiMattia did over at her blog where she filed it under:
    Dirt 2 Game, Dirty Tats, misogyny

    Also,

    See those red thingies immediately to my left?

    Those are quotation marks indicating a blockquote. That means that someone else is talking, not the Boing Boing editor.

    The blockquotes and tags are our friends. Seek out their guidance and be rewarded with deeper understanding.

  49. Anonymous says:

    @#17 Pecoto:

    That’s actually an interesting discussion point. Is the sexual objectification of men a step forward for straight female and gay male sexuality, or a step backward for humanity? It’s an ongoing debate in some of the feminist circles in which I’ve participated.

    Whether it’s worth mentioning is another discussion altogether. Yes, it definitely is worth mentioning. Misogyny is deeply embedded in our culture and it’s delivered to women in many, many small ways each day. It’s perfectly right to protest them.

    You can’t honestly believe that people should ignore something like discrimination just because a lot of people have been doing it for a long time. That doesn’t make any sense at all.

  50. mneptok says:

    “Volumptuous.”

    Like voluptuous, but more lumpy?

  51. AirPillo says:

    I will happily retract that cross-burning statement as excessive. I do agree it is. It was the result of anger, voiced inappropriately.

    The context here is that a marketing team objectified the female body as a commodity for a marketing message. I don’t think there needs to be a larger context there, at best it’s a distraction, at worst it’s a smokescreen for casting out group prejudices as fact.

    Is portraying a woman as breasts without a head offensive? Yes, it is. I don’t like it, I don’t believe it’s respectful. I would expect those responsible to apologize and attempt to learn what they did wrong.

    men who consist of dicks with no heads

    Those are your words. That wasn’t wrong, too? It was an offhand attempt to accomplish a simple goal of delivering a message, by objectifying and dehumanizing a human gender. That’s exactly what this ad was doing.

    If people aren’t interested in treating others with respect they don’t exactly have an argument to demand it. “Eye for an eye” justice is rightfully considered to be uncivilized. It certainly doesn’t help anyone.

    Anger isn’t a bad emotion, but expressing it with deliberate attempts at nonconstructive conflict is. People shouldn’t hide behind the protection of a noble cause just so they can pick a fight and have an ideological excuse. Being shielded by the moral standing of a cause is reliant on actually contributing to that cause in the effort in question.

    Stirring up a hostile crossfire of anger that doesn’t do a thing to make anyone respect anyone else any more than before most certainly does not contribute to gender equality.

  52. SeattlePete says:

    @#15 posted by hokano:

    That made me lol for reals.

    On topic, this is gross. I mean it’s fine if you’re 19 and this is your first paying “computer job”. I mean it beats working the helpdesk. But seriously, I hope there aren’t any adult males involved in bringing this campaign to market. I know that they wouldn’t be literal adults, just technical, but still…

    When the tide goes out, all the boats get lower.

  53. AirPillo says:

    Given that women have less money, fewer rights and less safety than men in virtually every corner of the globe, your concern for the tender feelings of men seems misguided.

    I believe I said people, not men. Attempting to inject gender into the issue isn’t at all constructive.

    They’re people, they deserve equal treatment. How does injecting an assumption of gender change that?

    People are people. If you can’t get along with them and would rather view them as inferior humans you’re still drawing arbitrary dividing lines through society with your opinions and setting up a mild form of discriminatory social segregation.

    It’s possible to disagree with people or be disappointed in them and still yield to them the same respect you and everyone else would hope for if you were ignorant or callous and did something wrong.

    I’ve disagreed with a lot of people here and I still respect everything they’ve said. Xeni, the commenters, moderators… I disagree with a lot of people present but they’re still every bit my equals and deserve to have an attempt made to disagree respectfully, even those whose remarks were cruel or inflammatory.

    This feels like some sort of variant on colisseum culture, I swear. Should people be singling out people who we construct a justification to be angry at, and then revel in the public backlash because they’re perceived to deserve it?

  54. nutbastard says:

    @#70

    no. haven’t you heard? misandry is just something the misogynists made up to oppress feminists :P

    seriously, though, it all depends on what the word ‘is’ means (with a tip of the hat to old bill clinton) – what is and isn’t something is highly subjective (as illustrated in this thread) but is largely decided by the consensus of those who give a shit about the subject at hand.

    in the true PC tradition where only women get to decide what’s misogynist and only minorities get to decide what’s racist, this one would be left up to men to decide. and im going to have to say, No, dildos are not a form of misandry. they’re a form of sexual gratification device, and to draw any parallels beyond that is to project concepts and stigmas onto an inanimate object that aren’t relevant.

    a dildo isn’t a demeaning object that trivializes men and reduces them to mere objects of sexual gratification. it’s a dildo.

  55. Takuan says:

    heh! does grow a pair mean a pair of assholes? Oh the jokes potential!

  56. jackalopemonger says:

    But seriously, I hope there aren’t any adult males involved in bringing this campaign to market.

    Hate to disappoint you, but I bet it was exclusively adult males who came up with and produced this misogynistic little gem.

  57. nutbastard says:

    @Lizdamnit

    who’s demonizing? how about the editors who look down their noses at this advertising campaign? who declare this to be misogyny, not only without any argument, but with an air of astonishment when an argument is requested, as if such a label is so self evident that the one asking is either legally retarded or not being serious, and such an inquiry is akin to asking for an argument for why someone has labeled water as being wet.

  58. AirPillo says:

    Seriously, take a look at some of the sentiment expressed here, by people whose roles are to enforce civilized debate no less.

    Challenging incumbent positions with an attempt at constructive logic, rather than being embraced as a critical part of the debate process, is instead an excuse to paint stereotypes at people and mock them.

    You know, not everyone is an expert at communicating. I’m sure not. Making a flawed attempt at an earnest dialog is not an excuse to flippantly go “fuck you, I’m better than you”.

    I am seriously disappointed by how little actual belief in equality and mutual respect actually exists here.

    The test of how much people really believe that fellow humans are their equals is how well they adhere to those principles when interacting with those who they really dislike. Do people stop being equals when they don’t agree with you? Will insulting them make them better people, make you a better person?

    Do you really want to encourage equality, and level criticism which furthers the cause, or do you just want to snipe at people you dislike because it feels good? It’s completely at odds with some of the values espoused by the people responsible for it.

  59. ColumbiaFire says:

    Methinks the original commentator, and most that follow, are overreacting a bit. Agree with at least the first part of #17. Sure, the ad may be in bad taste, but I wonder if that alone should single out from the thousands in the same vein that have preceded it. Not to say that just because something has been done in the past its necessarily good or right, just…come on, it fits a pretty common standard, albeit shallow, as far as using sexual objectification to promote a product. Sex sells. Anyway, I’d rather be allowed to see and play with this add than have someone censor it for PC reasons. Should it be prohibited merely because some find it objectionable?

  60. Metlin says:

    That’s actually an interesting discussion point. Is the sexual objectification of men a step forward for straight female and gay male sexuality, or a step backward for humanity? It’s an ongoing debate in some of the feminist circles in which I’ve participated.

    Whether it’s worth mentioning is another discussion altogether. Yes, it definitely is worth mentioning. Misogyny is deeply embedded in our culture and it’s delivered to women in many, many small ways each day. It’s perfectly right to protest them.

    You can’t honestly believe that people should ignore something like discrimination just because a lot of people have been doing it for a long time. That doesn’t make any sense at all.

    You must be a smash at parties.

    Racism when it happens is bad – however, calling every little thing racist does great injustice to real racism that goes on.

    Similarly, misogyny is bad – however, calling an ad campaign misogynist for showing boobies does great injustice to the real misogyny that takes place around us.

    Humans like other naked humans. Men like women, women like men, women like women, men like men… sometimes in singular, sometimes in plural. You get the idea.

    That does not mean that every ad campaign centered around naked people is necessarily rooted in hatred or discrimination. On the contrary, it is mostly rooted in human attraction.

    After all, I’ve had girlfriends ask me to tattoo my arm – I doubt that makes them misandrists.

    I will not lie and say that the picture shown wasn’t attractive – after all, it did have boobies. However, that in no way makes me a misogynist. Hell, even my girlfriend found that picture sexy, and does that make her a misogynist?

    Hate to disappoint you, but I bet it was exclusively adult males who came up with and produced this misogynistic little gem.

    Oh yeah? I know women in ad agencies who’ve come up with more suggestive ads than the males could ever dream of. You would be surprised.

  61. jackalopemonger says:

    Suggestive != misogynist.

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      Nope, nothing misogynistic about a woman who consists entirely of breasts with no head. But then, some of the comments seem to be from men who consist of dicks with no heads, so it all evens out in the end, eh?

  62. AirPillo says:

    Abstraction of the, er, “debate”… though not an actual paraphrasing of anyone present here>

    Person 1: “well, maybe it’s not entirely sexist”

    Person 2 @ Person 1: “you’re a sexist pig and I hate you for the following reasons…”

    Person 3: (accusation of reverse sexism)

    Person 4: (proceeds to actually engage in reverse sexism)

    Etc.

    Result: Almost everyone else being prejudiced and looking like total tools for whining about it as they’re busy doing it.

    “I hate you for being hateful! You’re less than human for not treating people as equals!”

    Do stay calm, please. This issue temporarily turns people into worthless idiots if they’re not careful.

  63. LLLLLL6 says:

    Sure sex sells but it’s all one-sided, women pleasing men, not the other way around. Women’s bodies are treated as a commodity to be bought, sold, handled and now written on. Sounds like most of you on the discussion board don’t have a problem with this or rather just don’t give a crap.

  64. Tdawwg says:

    Nutbastard, in aso many fashion and advertising photographs such as the above, when a woman’s body is focused on, displayed prominently, etc., when the model’s face isn’t shown, etc., could we at least agree that 1) men are rarely depicted this way, as objects of sexual desire without agency or identity, 2) that depictions such as this have traditionally been designed and made by heterosexual men for consumption by the same, 3) that said heterosexual (white) males have tended to Run The Show since forever, and have only grudgingly relinquished power to women and others, and only recently at that, 4) that relegating women to subservient roles as sexual objects has been a large part of #3, and thus 5) that such a depiction of women could be reasonably be described as sexist? This “air of astonishment” you’re noticing is perhaps due to the for-many-of-us-unsaid consensus regarding imagery such as this: that it essentializes women, depicts them as objects, denies them subjectivity, etc.

    John Berger has a lot to say about such imagery in Ways of Looking, but, really, this is Feminism 101: it’s kind of embarrassing to have to break it down for you.

  65. lizdamnit says:

    @Nutbastard again – I see your point, and I get your frustration/annoyance at those doing the “declaring” – it’s just that your original comment seemed to speak of things much larger and more pervasive than this app.

    Far as I’m concerned the app is silly and I’m not interested in *it* But, I often see sentiments similar to your other expressions and that’s the real meat of the sandwich. The rest I shall politely decline to touch :)

    And while I’m at it, Airpillo, you put forth something interesting, too: “Challenging incumbent positions with an attempt at constructive logic, rather than being embraced as a critical part of the debate process, is instead an excuse to paint stereotypes at people and mock them.”

    That is the stuff that keeps me, and proably a great deal of those in the feminist camps up at night, politically, rather than an echo chamber of abstractions about oppressive images. But that is my take on it and where I’ll be stopping.

  66. Anonymous says:

    I really think the debate is ridiculous because ANYONE with Rock Band can do this at their leisure… I know I have (and I’m a chick)

  67. Xeni Jardin says:

    Hahahahah. You dorks are as sad as the mouthbreathers who commented that the chick getting the maggot pulled out of her skull was sexy, and squealed inbetween your lines.

    Do I think this is a crime and should be banned and is destroying our childrens? No.

    Is much of gaming culture shitty to women? duh.

    Do I, as a woman, think it’s excellent material to poke fun at? Yeah.

  68. robulus says:

    Well I just had a little “stab” at it, and can concur that it is at best seriously dodgy. I mean its a big pair of boobs to draw on with a needle.

    I notice Colin McRae’s name is nowhere to be seen. The first releases in this series were faithful rally racing games, but it has descended into the action racing genre completely with this title. Pity. The Dirt 2 demo is fun, but completely lacking the authenticity that made the earlier release so engaging.

  69. wizardofplum says:

    #67 Jeni Tut, Tut young lady-NUTBASTARD- is not an asshole- assholes are useful.But he is a great shit disturber eh!

  70. AirPillo says:

    I think it’s really the meat of the issue myself. Stuff like this app, it’s just a symptom of a problem. It’s not necessarily valuable or important except as a reminder or a stimulus to spur a discussion.

    What bothers me, is that both sides of the issue cherish their ideals dearly and sometimes resort to very harsh treatment of one another.

    I always simply felt that gender should not be an issue, period. Gender does make people fundamentally different, yes, and denying that difference is missing the point as well, however on a societal level that difference needn’t be important, because obviously there is as much diversity among women and men as among society as a whole, and we cannot draw any hard rules about what makes each side who they are.

    People should do their best not to disrespect the opposite gender (regardless of which their own is) as a whole, and should be rebuked for doing things like this… but on the other hand, those who find it offensive should take care to practice the values they cherish.

    This ad is bad because it belittles and offends women. Responding by belittling and offending people is inappropriate as well, wholesale. It’s wrong for the exact same reasons the ad is wrong. Two wrongs don’t make a right.

    What I want to do is just challenge this behavior. What makes it wrong for these folks to offend women, and right for others to respond (knowingly and deliberately) in exactly the same fashion? Does righteous indignation make any nonviolent reaction to that indignation similarly righteous?

  71. AirPillo says:

    Nope, nothing misogynistic about a woman who consists entirely of breasts with no head. But then, some of the comments seem to be from men who consist of dicks with no heads, so it all evens out in the end, eh?

    Misogyny is in the intent. One sees an ad campaign that pretty much consists of nearly disembodied breasts and considers it offensive, and that’s pretty fair.

    However extending that to then presume that it’s misogynist is reactionary and unconstructive. Misogyny would be the further implication that not only is viewing women this way pleasant to some, but it is how they should be viewed.

    Assuming malice and hatred of women in the creators of this is infinitely more unrealistic than assuming the likely truth: the creaters were unimaginative marketing suits, tasked with creating an advertisement for a male-stereotype targeted videogame and true to the peter principle they chose to half-ass the job by making it consist of a pair of breasts and a tattoo needle.

    It actually is good marketing, albeit crass and disrespectful marketing. The very popular blog BoingBoing just ran a free advertisement for the game.

    People sometimes seem to have so much an axe to grind against perceived injustices that they’re often lurking around, waiting on something they can conceivably miscategorize as hatred as an excuse to pounce on it… now having a moral excuse for venting their own suppressed hatred.

    People who hate sexists to an unhealthy degree will take any excuse to raise a rabble and burn a cross on a “sexist” person’s lawn, so to speak.

    This ad doesn’t hate women, it’s just a crass offense to them. There is a very big difference and it truly is a disrespect to victims of REAL misogyny to call this watered-down crap misogyny.

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      People who hate sexists to an unhealthy degree will take any excuse to raise a rabble and burn a cross on a “sexist” person’s lawn, so to speak.

      Yeah, that anti-sexist violence is really tearing the world apart. When you compare laughing at some overgrown adolescent never-going-to-have sex fantasy with cross burning, your argument is what goes up in flames.

  72. Xeni Jardin says:

    Let me guess: you’re a guy, right?

  73. Birdseed says:

    This would easily fall to the advertising standards comittee if it was Swedish. For LOADS of reasons, I can’t fathom why some people appear to miss them.

    Sexist advertising 101:

    1. The product advertised (a racing game) has nothing to do with the woman in the flash. The boobs are only trying to sell and have no other purpose. Nor does the ad say anything about the game.

    2. The woman is reduced to a set of boobs. It’s not even objectification of the whole woman, just of the boobs. There’s nothing remotely resembling complexity in the depiction of the woman.

    3. The flash plays deeply into the dominant sexual stereotypes of the supposed sexist, male teen audience, and enforces them. It joins countless other depictions of women in the media to create a suggestion of what women are like that deprives them of power.

  74. octopod says:

    game’s had reasonable reviews, and tbh, I wouldn’t have noticed it if it wasn’t for this.

    otoh, this is just plain insulting to both men and women.

    so like, bit fail rly.

    devs love to whine about used game sales killing the industry, but rly, this is one time I’d have no problem with that.

  75. AirPillo says:

    I just dislike the way accusations of sexism always seem to play out. Someone claims someone else hates a certain type of someone else… and then proceeds to respond with hate.

    Nobody is educated, nobody is enlightened. It’s just a rabble of angry people dumping rage on each other.

    If people would move past the initial kneejerk and stop honing in on everything everyone else says that they don’t like as an excuse to respond in turn in an escalated degree…

    The quoted text is setting this up to be a flame war, because it’s not an analysis, not an attempt to foster discussion… it’s just someone seeing what they think is hate, and getting angry.

    It’s especially disappointing because this truly is not strictly misogyny, it’s only crass objectivization. It’s likely not made by someone who deliberately channeled a dislike of women. If someone actually responded to them with an attempt at discourse they might actually learn something and become a better person.

    Instead, most people will just snap, foam at the mouth, and burn the bridge.

    Great equality activists of the past didn’t make great strides to unite different people by responding with scorn, anger, and polarizing views. They did it by stressing (mostly) calm attempts at sitting down and talking to people. They only escalated when they had to, not when it felt good as an outlet for personal offense.

  76. AirPillo says:

    compare laughing at some overgrown adolescent never-going-to-have sex fantasy with cross burning

    That is exactly the sort of thing that actually prompted me to respond.

    I feel that people who are going to call others out for prejudice or insensitivity have a responsibility to be rational and constructive… otherwise they’re simply contributing to the net presence of conflict and prejudice in society.

    If people see something that may or may not be deliberately offensive, because it’s insensitive and appeals to disrespectful stereotypes… and then proceeds to make pointed, deliberate attempts to directly insult people and classify them as inferiors, I honestly think the latter offense is actually doing a lot more harm.

    What do you consider to be less enlightened? Insulting someone through ignorance, or trying your best to insult them on purpose? Which is more hateful?

    Most importantly: does it help anyone? Does it harm anyone? The answer to the former is probably no, the answer to the latter isn’t necessarily yes either, but it certainly can be. It sure as hell isn’t setting a very good example.

  77. robulus says:

    Cherry picking, Airpillo?

    Don’t leave such sweet juicy low hanging fruit then.

    Thing is, I don’t think that quote misrepresents your position, I think it summarises it.

    You misunderstood my other post, I don’t think your argument is hypocritical. It is internally consistent. I just think it betrays an embarrassing lack of socio-political awareness.

  78. hokano says:

    wizardofplum, I hope you don’t claim copyright on that line as I intend to use it early and often.

    The gentleman in question may well have been disturbing the shit, but more than once as I read through this I thought “OK, now he’s just taking the piss.”

  79. robulus says:

    I have to admit I am really a little staggered by the debate occurring here.

    Its like a group of people who would probably have a pretty good understanding of the code this flash app is written in are completely bewildered by some of the basic propositions of feminism.

    Nutbastard, Airpillo, are you guys aware of subtext and context in culture and media? Are you able to stand back objectively, and see the power structures in your society, and the mechanisms by which they are maintained? Or are you so immersed in your own culture you are incapable of any rational deconstruction of it?

    Sexism, racism and prejudice are often insidious and almost invisible from within cultures where they are normalised. The objectification of women for the sexual gratification of men is such a part of our culture it is tempting to think there is nothing wrong with it.

    But if you were looking for a good place to draw the line, this would be a great start.

    It can easily be differentiated from artistic depictions of the female form by context. It is targeted at a young male audience, it disembodies a womens breasts as an object of gratification, it allows a penetrative act to be performed (consensually), and the disembodied woman is disempowered and deferential.

    There is no question that the portrayal of women is contemptuous.

    Now how you want to react to that is up to you. I’m not saying it should be banned, and I don’t think anyone else here is either, but I do think calling the producers out on it is appropriate.

    I think pretending it is not clearly contemptuous of women is naive at the very least.

  80. Kieran O'Neill says:

    Airpillo: Xeni’s been quite clear that she’s laughing, not hating.

    You know, apart from the really creepy misogyny, I think this is pretty demeaning to tattoo culture.

    “Let’s see if you can tattoo as well as you race”. *shudder*

  81. AirPillo says:

    I don’t in the least believe it isn’t wrong, just that it isn’t hateful. I distinguish between sexism and misogyny, because they aren’t synonymous.

    I’ve repeatedly said it was in the wrong, but it isn’t hate… and I stand by that, unless anyone proves that this was done to hate people, and not just out of a lack of consideration for them.

  82. robulus says:

    @Octopod

    Yeah I’ve been playing the demo this week, it’s fun and looks great, good physics engine if a little arcade-y.

    But as I said earlier, Colin McRae seems to be AWOL, and the rally authenticity of the series has been replaced with lots of bendy lead guitar and disparate typfaces placed close together in day-glo colours. Not a fan myself, but the kids seem to go apeshit for it.

  83. Gloria says:

    @59: If you’re waiting for some kind of president of feminists to come and definitively tell you what all feminists think, I think you already know you’re going to be waiting a while (insert some kind of lame joke about how women never know what they want). As for how feminists apparently can’t decide what they believe in, I think it’s entirely fair for wildly varying beliefs to exist within a group — see any religious and political groups who happen to share a name.

    Re: topless issue, I do think it’s fair for it to be strictly legal for women to be publicly topless if they want to. In Ontario, where I live, it *is* legal.

    Personally? I wouldn’t be taking advantage of that right because I’d feel threatened. Not because I think every man I meet is a horndog, but because it only takes one asshole to potentially wreak serious emotional havoc with me.

    I hope wearing a shirt doesn’t make me a “bad feminist.”

    (My boyfriend and I have talked about this before, and he thinks even men who go around shirtless on the street, on the hottest days, are a bit tasteless.)

    Why don’t feminists fight for the right to go topless? Hmm. Maybe “we’ve got bigger fish to fry”?

  84. nutbastard says:

    i’ll never understand feminists.

    apparently, women being covered in burkas is misogynist and horrible.

    many argue for truly equal rights, such as the right to appear topless in public. this is the logical opposite of burka society. and yet…

    if a womans body is ever exposed to what PC people would call an improper degree, somehow we’re back to being misogynist, and she’s back to being exploited. oh, but only if we look. and somehow it’s even worse if we’re aroused. or something.

    well, dammit, which is it? it’s like you’re all about celebrating the female form – as long as it’s ‘tastefully’ presented, and no one could reasonably masturbate to it? why was it hard to not vomit, xeni? do boobies disgust you somehow? i thought boobies were one of the highlights of being a woman. and that the female form was to be celebrated.

    really, i can’t think of a set of circumstances that would satisfy the feminists, because it seems their complaints overlap in a meaningless-venn-diagram-clusterfuck of contradiction. you aren’t happy when women are pressured by society to wear clothes, and you aren’t happy when women are pressured by society to be naked.

    is it simply being pressured at all in any way that’s the problem? if so, why not complain about having to eat to subsist, or about how the dinosaurs died and how shitty that is?

    people want to fuck, and anything that comes close to reminding us of fucking will get our attention. and that’s not cultural, that’s biological. as a man i often feel demonized for wanting to put my penis in things. girl things. as if i should be ashamed of wanting to fuck and of all the things i do towards that end.

    can i still wolf whistle at a cute girl, or is that objectifying her? is that demeaning to her? does that make her feel less than valid? because the smile she shoots back says no.

    i just see all this harmless voluntary behavior going on being labeled with hateful words and i don’t get it. and any time a non feminist speaks up and says, “hey, girls, chill the fuck out, it’s all ok, lots of us like the attention guys pay us, we like wearing sexy clothes and being dominated in the bedroom, so what’s the big deal?”, soon enough a feminist shoots back with how she only feels that way because she’s been indoctrinated by The Man and that she’s a miserable, unliberated victim who is so badly entrenched in this misogynist world that she doesn’t even realize how miserable she is.

    so please, in clear terms, *what* do feminists want?

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      in clear terms, *what* do feminists want?

      For women to be treated with respect instead of viewed as a pair of breasts without a head. Also, to live in a world where men grow up as they get older.

      can i still wolf whistle at a cute girl, or is that objectifying her?

      Can a group of construction workers do it to your mother, or is she off limits?

      as if i should be ashamed of wanting to fuck and of all the things i do towards that end.

      You might consider being ashamed of making such a huge stink about what you want to do with your dick. Unless, of course, you regard it as the organ that makes the decisions in your life.

  85. robulus says:

    I don’t in the least believe it isn’t wrong, just that it isn’t hateful.

    Yeah well, you can make that distinction if you want, but I think the people saying it is hateful have excellent grounds for their argument, and I think the strategy of open ridicule of the authors is sound.

    I mean, reading your posts its kind of like your objection is to the tone of the discussion, which seems a little lame.

  86. robulus says:

    Speaking of naive, I said:

    Its like a group of people who would probably have a pretty good understanding of the code this flash app is written in are completely bewildered by some of the basic propositions of feminism.

    On reflection, that may be the most naive observation in the whole thread…

  87. nutbastard says:

    @ Marissa #52

    “This game, however, is ugly.”

    you obviously haven’t played Dirt 2, as it is a wonderfully beautiful game with very accurate yet easy to get used to physics, a wonderful rendering engine, vast detailed landscapes, and beautiful, fast, cars.

  88. celeb8 says:

    That place is so woman-hating and misogynistic! I mean they showed cleavage, what kind of woman would be so full of self-loathing that she would show parts of her breasts on the internet! And tattoos! Needles full of ink just like dirty metal phalluses full of man-poison! How dare they assume that some men (a large enough demographic to drive sales for example) would be attracted to women with tattoos?

    Frankly WOMYN can never be free until advertising stops showing things a certain demographic (for instance the demographic who would like to buy this “rape-game”)like to look at, and the word womyn stops being spelled with “men” in it!

    The worst part of that site is the big poster of breasts that say “I Hate Women” on it, they couldn’t be more clear as to their hatred of womyn than their sexyst misspelling of womyn and the fact that it says that they hate women. I’m pretty sure that’s misogynistic!

    We as womyn (and men who stand up for womyn hoping they’ll one day bless us by the inadvertent show of an ankle or a flash of their eyes through the burka) can only cower in fear in hopes that the rapemales stop tattoing innocent breasts and making video games. We will don our grey sweatshirts, and cry crouched over in our showers trying in vain to scrub the eye-filth away knowing that somewhere, some MAN, looked at a woman and thought about her breasts. With INK on them!

  89. Aloisius says:

    I find it interesting that you must be 19 years or older to visit that site.

  90. hokano says:

    Colin McRae’s not AWOL. He’s taking the long dirt nap. On Tuesday, he’ll be two years into it.

    obit

  91. Anonymous says:

    again at the-bastard-with-nuts,

    What feminists want is what most people want, which is to be valued for themselves.

    Burqas reduce women to 2 eyes and a tent.
    Stuff like this reduces women to bewbs.

    There are male equivalents:
    Men resent being seen as ‘walking wallets’.
    They don’t want to be devalued because of the size of either their muscles or their penis.

    It’s really quite simple: people resent being evaluated on a small component of what they have to offer. Maybe not all people, but a lot of them.

  92. Hawley says:

    lowbrow marketing? thats rich coming from someone who illustrates their work on other peoples bodies with permanent ink

  93. sworm says:

    What I find more demeaning is beauty magazines…

    How many women have committed suicide because of porn? How many because of a silly game ad aimed at pubescent boys? How many because they aren’t a ‘perfect’ size?

    If you think however, that men aren’t a victim of stereotyping you are sadly deluded. The muscly man ideal is also prevalent. This results in (young) men taking dangerous steroids and becoming anorexic. It also results in a lot of suicides.

    Ballet: if you’re a boy you’ll get bullied. If you’re an adult, gay.

    Hairdresser: have to be gay. A real men can’t be a hairdresser. (I know straight men who pretend to be gay otherwise no women will trust them)

    As a boy, when my dog died, I cried. I was told to stop being a girl.

    Custody: almost always goes to the mother. Because men can’t be as good parents women.

    Why is it that girls are allowed to act like boys, but boys aren’t allowed to act like girls? Is it because being a woman is demeaning? Possibly, but in the end the boy is the one who is limited.

    Gender stereotypes don’t only hurt women. They hurt everyone, because ultimately everyone is partly masculine and partly feminine. Because there is no real link between sexuality and gender.

    BUt what do I know, I’m only a dumb jock.

  94. Anonymous says:

    This was my answer to their little game marketing gem they have there. http://satatica.net/images/pwnage/ohsnap.jpg

    - satat

  95. Anonymous says:

    But is the game any good?

  96. sworm says:

    *percieved as demeaning

  97. davman says:

    Now those are some dirty pillows…

  98. Antinous / Moderator says:

    The obviously sex starved Codemasters who created the tattoo game know how to do creepy well, albeit unintentionally.

    Now we have to re-evaluate all those tattoos that say ‘♥ Mom ♥’.

  99. highlyverbal says:

    Ms. Jrdn, y pt th “jrk” n kn-jrk.

    I made a boob tattoo with the message “i’m up here” and an arrow. It was ironic and empowering.

    I find a big difference in the idea that “we could inscribe messages on boobs in a lowbrow ad campaign” and the idea that “women are no more than boob-message-carriers.” Like AIRPILLO, I find this to be a watered-down type of mysogyny. I think that everyone could agree with AIRPILLO’s remark: “the creaters were unimaginative marketing suits” You may disagree, but if so you have to Dworkin your ass up and fight the good fight. Remarks like “let me guess you’re a guy” are weaksauce. Feminists threw that bit away in the friggin’ ’50s.

    Shocking, messages on boobs are lowbrow!

    Next you will tell us that in Japan, when cute young girls dress up as maids, men like it!

  100. AirPillo says:

    I mean, reading your posts its kind of like your objection is to the tone of the discussion, which seems a little lame.

    Beyond that, actually. My point is that the subject matter is only arguably hateful, when the tone taken in response is deliberately, consciously, and unrepentantly hateful.

    Taking that sort of tone… what exactly is the basis for this being wrong? I mean, if it’s okay to hate, then what’s the argument against this again? If it’s not okay to hate, why is it being done here?

    The assignment of perceiving this as hate is tempting to classify as a projection of the feelings of its critics. It’s viewed as hate because hate is the emotion people are feeling in response to it.

    I think its makers should be engaged in a working criticism of what they’ve done and asked to apologize. Opting to hurl stereotype-oriented insults at them will instead make the speaker look like one hell of a tool.

    It’s just… bad… to decry something in the very same breath you use to DO it.

  101. robulus says:

    Nutbastard asked:

    like the guy you don’t know talking shit about you, why even give this stuff that upsets you the time of day? why dignify it with a response?

    Ha!

    Why indeed.

  102. robulus says:

    @Sworm

    So you’re arguing that sexism is OK because it cuts both ways, right?

  103. Gloria says:

    What strikes me is that this concept — writing on a woman — is not just this particular iteration.

    Everyone’s pretty familiar with the images of women offering their cleavage to celebrities for signature and truly misogynistic men (ok, this is the best example I could think of, but: John Malkovich’s Vicomte de Valmont in Dangerous Liaisons) using nude women as a kind of human desk for composing letters.

    The difference is that the shift from pens to permanent inking adds a new implication of physical force — yeah, a needle piercing your skin hundreds of times is pretty physically forceful — but retains the casual amusement of autographing boobies and using your girlfriend/one-night stand as your correspondence desk. It’s a really weird combination.

  104. Teller says:

    Generally, teen gamers don’t know what to do with women and, instead of pointing out their inexperience and inabilities, marketers wisely excite them with some big Crofts so they can jack off, which is what they’re best at anyway.

  105. Gloria says:

    @84: Who’s arguing against you?

  106. Anonymous says:

    @Hawley,

    About whom are you speaking? Neither Marissa nor any of the BB staff are tattooists – Marissa writes a blog about tattooing and related topics but does not illustrate her work on other people’s bodies with ink permanent or otherwise.

    But maybe you would care to explain just exactly how tattooing is necessarily low brow (sure, it can be but it isn’t necessarily as you imply)- please I could use the laugh

  107. Tdawwg says:

    Sorry, but has it been established that the coders, art directors, photographer, etc., of the above site are all “sex-starved” heterosexual men? I find the tacit assumption many are making that they all are to be itself sexist. Like somehow straight or queer women couldn’t or wouldn’t trade on the sexist-misogynistic image bank of our collective unconsciousness to make some quick $$$? For real?

  108. AirPillo says:

    Alright, since I’ve misstated myself so spectacularly so far, I’ll summarize myself what’s important that I’m trying to say:

    Please don’t be a jerk to people, even people you don’t like.

    If people are going to be jerks, they deserve to be criticized for being jerks. No amount of shell-gaming with alleged progressive causes is going to annul that. What’s wrong for someone else is wrong for you and I too.

  109. robulus says:

    @Hokano

    Ah. Well that kind of settles it, and kind of raises more questions. The game seems to be listed as Colin McRae: Dirt 2, but his name doesn’t appear anywhere on the merchandising.

    Still, that does explain why they’ve gone in a “different direction”. Thanks for clearing that up!

  110. nutbastard says:

    @#61

    “For women to be treated with respect instead of viewed as a pair of breasts without a head.”

    Women aren’t viewed as a pair of breasts with no head. A pair of breasts with no head isn’t viewed as a woman, it’s viewed as a disembodied pair of breasts with no head.

    “Can a group of construction workers do it to your mother, or is she off limits?”

    Sure they can, why not? She’s getting a bit up in age there, and why wouldn’t she appreciate a positive critique of her appearance?? Furthermore, why would/should that bother me? They’re all just people.

    “You might consider being ashamed of making such a huge stink about what you want to do with your dick. Unless, of course, you regard it as the organ that makes the decisions in your life.”

    I didn’t exactly reveal the secrets of the lost ark there, it’s common knowledge that people like to fuck, and that things that are fucking-related are likely to garnish extra attention. My beef was with the fact that men are demonized for ‘falling for’ such cheap and easy advertisement methods.

    As a man who only has sex with women with whom i am exclusively involved with (a modest four women at this point) i find your insinuation that my penis is my decision making organ to be crass, ignorant, stereotypical and sexist.

Leave a Reply