Re: Concern about racism and sexism in Supertuxkart 0.9
suso.baleato@gmail.com writes:
>> > Ansgar Burchardt escreveu:
>> >
>> > I find you equating images like [1] with "Hentai porn characters" a bit
>> > disturbing... Same for jumping to conclusions about the authors earlier:
>
> Of course not that one. Judge yourself:
>
> http://i.imgur.com/FkeD8PV.jpg
> http://i.imgur.com/NMD1gmJ.jpg
> http://i.imgur.com/fNo3HDj.jpg
> http://i.imgur.com/Zkil96v.jpg
> http://i.imgur.com/X8sYzYc.jpg
These are about as much "Hentai porn characters" as
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Strutting_%285364339653%29.jpg
are "hardcore porn actresses". That is the characterization as
"(typical?) Hentai/real porn characters" has no meaning for these
images: one could call anything "(typical?) Hentai/real porn characters"
when the person doing so wants to see someone as a "Hentai/real porn
character" for whatever reason...
>> > "they understood that featuring a Hentai-alike adolescent might be
>> > effective to attract end users, while being fun at the same time."[2].
>
> Sure. I have explicitly asked why that sexualized character was included
> in the game [1]. I wanted to discern whether it was because:
>
> a) it plays some role in the storyline, or
> b) it was just the outcome of sexist behavior among developers
Or c) other reasons. The real world doesn't just have a) and b).
> My question was cristally clear answered by this Debian developer [2]:
>
> "The phrase "male gaze" refers to content rendered from the *point of
> view* of the (implicitly heterosexual) male. So images of women
> instead of men isconsistent with this idea, on the grounds that men
> would rather look at ("sexy") images of women than at images of
> men."
Please read the mail more carefully: only the expression "male gaze" was
explained. In the third and forth sentence, the mail explicitly states
that this is no comment on the content:
| I won't comment on the content itself. Interpreting any particular image as
| "privileging the male gaze" is subjective.
> I will be happy to consider any countefactual. At this moment, what
> facts support is that explanation. Perhaps some important piece of
> information is still missing, so I will still wait for a while
> before fixing my conclusions.
I'm happy your misunderstanding above that lead you to draw wrong
conclusions could be cleared. Please consider being more careful before
making such allegations in the future.
Ansgar
> References:
> [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-women/2015/04/msg00022.html
> [2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-women/2015/04/msg00024.html
> [3] https://lists.debian.org/debian-women/2015/04/msg00027.html
Reply to: