Apology for Pheega
circusblatta on 2012/05/27 20:12
of Forked Tail
This morning i was surprising for the bad rating and one comment.
I don't know why we recived so low rating, compared to “pluto the ninth planet” and “camouflage” the game is more complete, but clearly we made some mistakes.
The comment is:
“... I really object to the sexual
objectification of the female
lead, starting with the picture of
her bum in the intro sequence. It felt gratuitous and
exploitative,
and definitely not cool.”
The opening comic is a comic and in the comics there are often sexual references. I created Pheega with the help of Milo Manara comics, these comics are full of sexual picture but I don't belive he depicts the women like objects, the female character of Milo Manara are always strong and indipendent, like Pheega. Besides I like the female body and I enjoyed drawing this scene. If you consider this picture exploitative you must consider the cute animals, cultural references and more exploitative too: they are all potential way of win the others over. In any case we do the games because we like doing them and because the peole appreciate them. If someone appreciates the butt of pheega my purpose is reached.
If I like drawing in this way I will not censor myself for possible misunderstanding due to wrong point of view.
“Only the self-censorship is worse then the censorship” Andrea Pazienza (1956-1988).
Sorry for my english.
(log in to comment)
Comments
mauve on
2012/05/28 21:15:
Please.
"Besides I like the female body and I enjoyed drawing this scene."
I like women. See the difference?
"If you consider this picture exploitative you must consider the cute animals, cultural references and more exploitative too"
False equivalence.
"If someone appreciates the butt of pheega my purpose is reached"
Well, if some of us think it's gratuitous and damaging to the Python community's inclusiveness, you stand to lose points. That is all.
cyhawk on
2012/05/28 21:33:
circusblatta on
2012/05/28 21:55:
2.Obviously I was talking about aesthetics not about my life.
3.I don't understand why it is a false equivalence. If I draw something cute, you maybe appreciate the "cuteness" not necessarily the quality of the picture.
4.Of course.
sty on
2012/06/17 13:28:
AHAHAHAHHAHA
I found this statement more dumb and outraging than a robot butt...
@circusblatta: sbattitene, certa gente non c'ha un cazzo da fare XD
sty on
2012/06/17 13:37:
I also find the depiction of a subliminal flying penis damaging to the python community's inclusiveness, as a statement of masculine predominance thru elevation... XD
That's how political correctness poison your brain.
superjoe on
2012/06/17 21:41:
Furthermore, it is not making a statement about women. If you want to talk about logical fallacies, mauve, then I'd like to point out the most glaring one of all that you are making.
Your point is:
1. This game features a shapely woman's bum.
2. Therefore, this game objectifies women.
Non-sequitor. Featuring a woman's nice bum does not imply that the woman is an object.
Taking it a step further, what's wrong with objectifying different classes of people in fiction? It's a useful story-telling tool, and you'd have a hard time supporting the claim that such objectification harms people in real life.
mauve on
2012/06/20 06:55:
@superjoe:
Actually my argument was not based solely on a bum. I would have few problems with a bum were it attached to a character with a face, or in the spirit of gender equality, where the men are portrayed as handsome adonises in skimpy costumes too. It was the way the story was presented that the women had to get out her bum and hide her face while the dirty old men just stood around in suits watching.
Pyweek represents the Python community. Richard talks about it at Pycon and encourages Python developers to participate. I've done the same at various local events. This game is an entry in Pyweek and therefore shares some of that responsibility.
I agree objectifying people in fiction is much less egregious than objectifying real people. However this wasn't high art, studying some aspect of the human experience - it was a plot entirely designed to get a woman into an outrageous costume so we could gawp at her.
sty on
2012/06/20 17:28:
@mauve:
"One of the most common mistakes when attempting to spot satire that makes use of Reductio ad Absurdum is to confuse it with an argument based on Appeal to Ridicule. These two strategies rely on similar concepts that take the logic of an argument to an absurd extreme. However, appeal to ridicule is a logical fallacy, it is generally used to take an argument that is counter-intuitive and say that it is wrong simply for that reason."
(cit. http://fyssatire.wikispaces.com/Reductio+ad+Absurdum )
My point is that if you bring in the questionability content factor in the votes, not only you're voting an entry with the wrong parameters (thus altering the significance of the results), you're also lobbying to push in content censorship, with parameters based on personal political views and subjective cultural perceptions.
Your action is subtle, you're trying to build a feeling of "responsibility" that is in fact nonexistent, because it doesn't have anything to do with the technical benefits of pyweek, the actual rules of the competition and the real value that pyweek brings into the python community.
Triggering guilt trips into active participants in a public forum is not nice in the first place, and it's a strategy doomed to failure in the long term. I think you're doing politics, because you believe that promoting pyweek means associating your image with the overall content produced by it, and you think you have a reputation to defend.But with your premises everything that is not strictly technical or scientific can be questionable, even your dick-shaped squid. So what we have to do? Bring in rules for the game assets? Let's use only triangles and squares, they sure don't hurt anyone, don't they?
So mine is still satire, and yours is still involuntary comedy
(let's just pretend it can't get worse than that).
mauve on
2012/06/21 06:58:
Regarding censorship, I'm lobbying not for censorship but wiser use of the medium to create a more inclusive atmosphere. Those are my personal political and social views and I believe I'm justified in using them to guide my ratings. To use a real Reductio ad Absurdum, your argument is that our rating should not be coloured by political or cultural views - how then would you rate a game that revolved around the player participating in coprophagia?
More to follow when I have time to post...
sty on
2012/06/21 11:44:
Regarding the coprophagia example, let's view the rating categories one by one:
FUN: yes, i can easily find hilarious the idea of eating shit to win, i can project myself into the game atmosphere and not being a coprophile at the same time, and even without becoming one after! Wonders of the brain!
Yes someone else will not have so much fun, so let's admit this is the only category that can be influenced somewhat. The game also can't be fun for some other reasons than shit eating. It can be boring, or frustrating...
Content nature negative influence = 20% to be fair
PRODUCTION: the nature of the content doesn't have anything to do with the QUALITY and POLISH. A well done shit eating animation, is still a well done animation.
Content nature negative influence = 0%
INNOVATION: same as before, the innovative game mechanics doesn't have anything to do with the content nature, except for the case when the content is never seen before, so it can bring up the vote, and not detract from it. I can upvote shit eating just because i have never seen it before in a somewhat original game atmosphere.
Content nature negative influence = -20%
OVERALL : 0%
And you can easily substitute 'coprophagia' with every controversial argument you can make up.
circusblatta on
2012/06/29 11:49:
Please, we are not a evil genii.
superjoe on
2012/05/28 18:53:
We had a pseudo-debate about this in IRC. Not everyone agreed that this was objectification of women.