Month: October 2006

No, Virginia, Fangirl/boy are not gender neutral!

tekanji

Sorry for the slew of short posts, but I’m trying to juggle a thousand things at once. Even so, Ragnell has this amazing post looking at the gender differences between “fangirl” and “fanboy” called Fan-What? Given my recent post on a Wii gift guide that used the term “fanboy,” I think it’s pretty relevant. And interesting!

Here’s an excerpt:

This reminded me of a conversation Kalinara and I had yesterday that has me musing on the term “fangirl” today. It’s a linguistic issue, mainly. In theory, Fanboy and Fangirl are simply gendered terms to differentiate a male fan and a female fan. In practical use, they have not only a different gender but an entirely different meaning.

[…]

Fanboy is a “Blue” term, as in “Blue is for Boys.” Whereas, Fangirl is a “Pink” term, as in “Pink is for Girls.” There is nothing inherently wrong with blue or pink. Both are fine colors, moods, acceptable lifestyles. But these colors represent traditional gender roles. The pink term of Fangirl embraces traditionally feminine traits like emotional/romantic thinking, pastel colors, cutesy things, and an audible high-pitched squeal associated with hearing about an opportunity to meet David Cassidy. The blue term of Fanboy embraces traditionally masculine traits like logical/statistical thinking, primary colors, blood and gore, and manly grunting/deep voiced “oh yeah”s.

Now go read the rest!

Drinking and Choice

tekanji

Doing my dishes, I remembered a conversation I had at a local bar and it gave me a “WTF??” moment in terms of how I thought of the idea that people who get so drunk they can’t remember are always responsible for it. I mean, we often hear about being careful around one’s drink due to date rape drugs being put in it. And, yeah, it means that if I’m out I only leave my drink with a friend I’d trust my life to. But I always had this assumption in the back of my mind that if it was just alcohol, that the person’s personal responsibility — even in the face of peer pressure — was paramount.

I’m not so sure anymore.

See, this is a story I heard — verified by one of the men involved calling up the one who had gotten drunk when I expressed concern over his health since no one had heard from him. I’ll call the drunk guy Peter (not his real name, in fact if I use any other names they will all be fake). According to the guys at the bar, Peter has health problems so he shouldn’t drink. The other night they decided to get him drunk — again, after expressing concern I was assured many times that Peter had expressed interest in drinking, though given their actions I’m skeptical in terms of what kind of pressure they put on him.

To his knowledge, he only had two beers. Maybe with his meds it would be enough to push him to the “I don’t remember anything from last night,” point, but maybe not. But, see, he didn’t really just have two beers. The second one was spiked by these friends of his — most of whom, if I understand correctly, have known him for over a year — with a shot of some really strong liquor. His drunken state was recorded on audio and has been passed around for laughs.

It really upset me to hear about this, though I don’t think I really connected with why until just now. This man was given a certain amount of alcohol without his knowledge for the express purpose of getting him drunk, it was potentially dangerous given his medical condition, and his subsequent behaviour was recorded and used to give the perpetrators of this act something to laugh about.

Thankfully it doesn’t seem that any longstanding harm was done, though I don’t know if he knows about the recording. He may or may not know about the extra alcohol he was given by now, and that may or may not bother him. But it bothers me. Because, even though he’s okay and even though nothing more “serious” happened to him aside from being humiliated by his “friends,” the implications of that kind of situation — and the possibilities for harm — are immense.

And this, of course, is all passed off as “good fun” by those who perpetrate it.

The Ultimate Wii Shopping List: So Close to Getting It Right

tekanji

As you all should know now by the Girlfriend Lists category (which I plug at every opportunity), I have a passing interest in the presentation and language of gift guides. So, y’all can imagine how excited I got when I saw The Ultimate Wii Shopping List by Mitchell Saltzman and realized that it broke the categories down not by gender, but rather by budget, casual, and hardcore gamers. Joy!

I clicked excitedly through the pages — not because I am looking for recommendations for whenever I get my Wii, but because, golly gosh, there was so much beautiful gender-neutral language! Witness the amazing address of “you” without adding “boys” or “men”. Marvel at the lack of condescending language like “ladies” when talking about accessories for the console! Swoon over the lack of stereotyping to justify recommendations! I mean, jeez, Saltzman uses aspects like actual gameplay and comparison to previous games in order to explain his recommendations! Novel!

When I got to the second page, I was asking myself, “Could this be love? Have I finally found the elusive perfectly gender neutral gaming guide? Is it time to hang up my critic’s hat and admit that I’ve been defeated?”

But, fear not, loyal readers who obviously love (and love to hate!) my scathing wit. This otherwise perfect guide had a hiccup on page three; the title for the section is Hardcore Wii Fanboy. Please, Saltzman, tell me that you weren’t using gender neutral langauge because you assumed “male as default” for gamers? It would make me cry.

Still, if you can mentally turn the “Fanboy” into “Fan” (the only instance of a gendered word in the entire thing! Wah!), then I’d say that this guide should be the template for anyone who is going to write a guide of any kind. So, Saltzman, if you ever read this (hey, I’ve been e-mailed by the creators of lists before, it’s not impossible!), then thanks for the good job, but next time is there any chance you could remember that not all hardcore fans are guys? This hardcore gamer would certainly appreciate it.

Via digg.

Catholic League Plays the Victim Blaming Card

tekanji

The Catholic League in response to former congressman Mark Foley remarking that he was abused by a clergyman:

“As for the alleged abuse, it’s time to ask some tough questions. First, there is a huge difference between being groped and being raped, so which was it Mr. Foley? Second, why didn’t you just smack the clergyman in the face? After all, most 15-year-old teenage boys wouldn’t allow themselves to be molested. So why did you?”

Getting victim blamed for abuse and molestation ain’t just for the girls, apparently. Not exactly the kind of “gender parity” I’d like to see, though.

Via Darth Sidhe.

Female Villains Can't Win

tekanji
NWN 2 Villains
NWN2 Villains

The lineup for the villains in the next Never Winter Nights game has gotten some press over at Joystiq. Despite neither of the female villains being the “evil hot babe[s] we’ve grown accustomed to in the role playing genre”, the contrast between their stances and that of the male villain are striking.

He’s hunched slightly, in a way that looks like he’s going to charge you; a very active stance, and not one that draws attention to either his sexual organs or his musculature (the former being the trope for “powerful” women and the latter being the trope for “powerful” men). Described by Joystiq’s Alan Rose as “a frenzied berserker”, this “bald dude” seems to typify the Brute; he’s not exactly a high class villain, but even so he’s only one of many types of villain archetypes that one can choose from.

Which brings me to the next villain in the lineup; the “blue chick”. In terms of body type, if you took away the blue skin, changed her head, and upped her breast size a cup, she could almost be the twin of the other female villain. Of course, the one-size-fits-all female body type isn’t an issue confined to NWN (or even video games), and I gotta give the company points for the differences that are there.

In some ways, the blue villain isn’t the ideal of beauty: most notably, she has an odd-shaped head. But, looking at her posturing and her outfit there is definitely an element of sexuality that isn’t there with the Brute. While, with her sword raised high there’s no doubt that there’s an element to power in the blue villain’s posture, she’s shown in a 3/4 pose that causes the lines of her arms form a V that emphasises her chest. Costume wise, though I’m not sure what’s skin and what’s fabric, she appears to be wearing a chainmail loincloth and a halter top that is open to cleavage.

Finally, we have the last villain. Though her face is the recipient of Rose’s criticism (“Seriously, if you take away the flotation devices, we’ve got some serious androgyny going on here.”), I rather like that her face is less feminine than the blue villain’s. No, it’s not because I hate attractiveness, but rather because it seems to be one step in the direction of portraying many different types of women.

That said, she, too, is sexualized for all of her supposed androgyny. Her hands-on-hips position is, again, one of power (in this case its’ the power of defiance), but it also emphasizes her hips in a way that makes it clear that she’s supposed to be read as feminine. Her costume, with the focal point being her cleavage, does the same.

Honestly, I feel bad for the female villains out there — not only do they have to contend with the sexist digs if they don’t fit the “hot villain babe” category, but they still can’t seem to get away from sexualization even when it seems that their characters aren’t there to be sexualized! Come on, video game companies, won’t somebody think of the villains?

Apolygys

jfpbookworm
[Crossposted to my Vox blog.]

Amy Gahran has a good post up about apologies and why they’re necessary.

The post was sparked by Amy Alkon‘s advice column about cheating, entitled “Along Came Polyamory.” Understandably, many polyamorous folk were miffed at the equation of the concepts. (It’s hard enough figuring out who’s okay with the concept without it being confused with unethical behavior.) But rather than apologize for causing offense, Ms. Alkon decided to take the offensive, complaining that those who had a problem just didn’t understand her irony, and basically just being a big bully.

Coincidentally enough, I had just discovered Ms. Alkon’s anti-feminist screed “Victims Gone Wild” the other day. She seems to be one of those “postfeminists” in the vein of ifeminists or IWF that figure that since they’re privileged, anyone who complains that they’re not is just adopting a “victim mentality,” and that feminism is unnecessary because of what someone said Dworkin or Mackinnon said a couple decades ago.

Ms. Gahran’s post, though, could have been sparked by any of the non-apologies of late (Ann Althouse, Harlan Ellison, and so on all the metaphorical way back to “she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.”) Why is it so hard for people to apologize for offending people? It can be done.

That's not Mii!

tekanji

Update Dec 30, 2006: I’m admitting it straight up: I jumped the gun on this one and looked foolish because of that. I should have taken the time to frame it properly (examining why the preview program was this way, rather than addressing the Mii system, which wasn’t out yet) and then waited for the Wii to come out to do a comparison with the actual Mii system (which has its flaws as well as its good points).

However, my mistake is not an invitation to break the discussion rules. Commenters seem to be incapable of pointing out my flawed logic without calling me “stupid” or using terms like “whining” or “crying”. Since those kinds of comments are the only one this post continues to receive, I’m shutting off all comments. I’m not sure there’s anything else to be said on this issue, anyway, unless I make a new post that discusses the actual Mii system.

***

For those of you not in the gamer-know, one of the features that’s going to be available on Nintendo’s upcoming console, the Wii, is that you’ll be able to make an avatar of yourself, which will appear Mii channels and even represent you in some of the games. Sounds cool, right?

Well, not if you’re a glasses-wearing, green-haired loving, spiky haired woman who wants an avatar that even slightly resembles her. That’s right, folks, your resident blogger has checked out the Mii preview that was recently leaked.

Male-normative mindset, meet gaming avatar.

Since there is only one body type to choose from, the only ways I could signifiy my gender are long hair, eyelashes, and red lips. Every other combination I’ve tried resulted in it looking like a man. I’m not a man, I’m just not a wide-eyed, lip-puckering, long-haired girl. But that doesn’t make me any less female, or any less interested in having a Mii who, I dunno, looks even somewhat like me.

Since this is pre-launch, there’s still hope that they’ll introduce more body shapes. Maybe even some non-human ones (’cause sometimes I don’t want a freaky chibi-styled human to represent me, even if it did look like the correct gender). I’m hoping, because otherwise it’ll put a serious dent in my willingness to buy a Wii — especially if the avatar-using games are popular.

New Blog: The Silence of Our Friends

tekanji

The Silence of Our Friends seems to have come about because of the recent Clinton blogger lunch debacle. Personally, I’d call this blog the silver lining to a dark, dark cloud.

An excerpt from Donna’s most recent post:

One example is when discussing racially divisive issues a white person will pipe up that we should leave behind identity politics and concentrate our efforts on the greater good. But the greater good generally means that white people determine what issues are important and in our collective best interests, and this may be of very little service to POC. We think that the collective good should be working towards ALL of our interests, not just yours. You can not find out what we believe is in our interest if you aren’t even willing to listen to us, and instead dismiss us. This does not mean that we expect to only work on our issues, we expect to discuss and compromise; it is the white person who expects to only work on what they choose as important while we are expected to be quiet and go along to get along.

One other thing, when white people do recognize institutional racism many times they do not speak out. They think it’s not their problem and look the other way. This is why there was so much anger expressed over the Clinton blogger lunch by POC. Our allies abandon us when we need them. The bloggers there did not make it a priority to find out why diverse voices weren’t included and explain to their readers. And the blogosphere in general either did not see a problem, or were afraid of the reaction of their peers if they sided with POC, for instance by delinking or banning them.