As parents, we would ban children from playing video games depicting women in skimpy costumes
Debate Rounds (4)
FIRST ROUND IS ACCEPTANCE.
Definition: The video games meant here are those which although not targeted just for children, they are also deemed to be appropriate for kids (14 years of age and below). These include but not restricted to the Tomb Raider series, catwoman, final fantasy and many, many more. In these video games, female characters are almost always dressed skimpily. The popular saying of "you would think she would wear more armor' comes to mind.
This of course, does not include video games which are explicitly made for adult entertainment. Nor is it an issue if kids are old enough, say around 15 years of age.
This debate will not be on the role of females in the video games or how they walk, talk etc. It is only on the attire.
Looking forward to a good debate.
Video games are very influential on a child's development. Video games today, are seen not as a mere time-waster to spend the summers indoors, but as a very engaging and stimulating platform where kids learn to think critically, where they increase their vocab reading and listening to the audio, and where they can challenge themselves and compete healthily with peers. More and more parents allow their kids to play video games while still controlling the amount of hours spent and the material which is played. However, many parents seem to overlook that having females who are dressed in revealing attires can be very damaging to their kids. They make the excuse that kids are 'too young' to understand sexual stimulus.
My first argument is that these representation of women enforces the belief or the culture that women are present merely as sex symbols. Not only do very little video games have lead heroines, the heroines that do exist (sometimes in supporting roles) choose to turn up in as little clothes as possible. This is exaggerated by physical oversexualisation like impossibly wide hips and chests. Kids unconsciously register this and grow up with this female stereotyping. This is particularly damaging to young female gamers who find a lack of female role models. This is why 'gaming' is almost entirely synonymous with a male audience.
Even if you say that men sometimes turn up shirtless, the physical attributes of the male character just proves how strong he is. But when the female character is dressed skimpily, it is not to show how strong she is but merely to 'reward' the gamer by exposing more skin. In games like Lara Croft, the camera is placed at strategic angles to make sure the gamer has a good glimpse of her legs, cleavage etc.
Boys and girls learn about the world through media including video games. We don't want them to view females merely as eye candy.
BoggleBros37 forfeited this round.
This sort of goes both ways because (to males) male video game characters who do wear little to no clothing can be seen as sex symbols or objectifying but it's just that, to us males, it's not really a big deal or something to worry about.
I don't how you see female characters in video games with a big cleavage or waist objectifying but a male muscular man with a perfect body and abs not objectifying, not all men look like this.
I guess the only reason why you're saying this is because you're looking at it from a females perspective. To me, both genders are objectified in video games, so if you were to ban all games with females wearing skimpy costumes then you'd probably be left with the games where the male characters (looking muscular and having abs) can be used, which again to a males perspective, is objectifying.
My opponent says that it is all a matter of perspective. Sadly, in most scenes where a male character gets shirtless, the camera does not pan up and down their body. Sure, anything can be sexually objectifying if you look at it that way, but when the camera is strategically placed over a female's body it's hard to think that that is not done for audience benefit.
Furthermore, the majority of video games do not at all depict male characters in this way. But you will find no shortage of female characters dressed provocatively in questionable poses. For example, in the Batman games, Batman is not sexualized but Catwoman appears in skin tight latex catsuit. If you argue that this is because of the character, you will find that when you control Catwoman, the camera is always someone showing part of her butt and the suggestive sway of her hips in the catsuit as she walks.
In the game Street Fighter, yes there are shirtless males but that's about it. They are shirtless in a game which is arguably mostly played by guys anyway. And then, there are female characters dressed in low cut shirts and skirts where the fact is you don't need to (especially as a girl) to show skin to prove you are 'strong'. The only reason the character is showing skin here is to be sexy, not to show their fighting strength.
At the end of the day, my opponent argues that both male and females are objectified. To me, that is beside the point. If a particular video game objectives men or women, then parents need to ban their children from playing them. Thus, if a video game depicts a female in a skimpy costume, this video game should not be circulated among the kids. So long as my opponent agrees that children should not be playing any video game that objectifies either sex, he is still agreeing with me and not actually opposing the motion.
My opponent also never rebutted the argument that these games are detrimental to the development of children.
The point of a video game is to make it realistic for the gamer to play and enjoy. So when they give female characters these short and revealing costumes they're only trying to give the gamer a realistic experience. Because there are real females out there who dress in short, revealing clothes in public. Also the gaming industry is dominated by males, which is probably why there are females in little to no clothes in video games, maybe this is how males in the video game business to catch people's attention. My opponent is wrong when she/he says this, No (male) will ever look at a female character and think of it as a "sex symbol".
also in round 2, pro states...
"This is exaggerated by physical oversexualisation like impossibly wide hips and chests. Kids unconsciously register this and grow up with this female stereotyping".
Now days a lot of females tend to get plastic surgery, making them get wider hips, bigger chests, and bigger buttocks. So not only video games give kids this idea of females having, bigger everything but real women out there in the public do to. With their fake "features", younger males would confirm that the type of females in video games is exactly like the type of women you can find in real life.
"the camera is always someone showing part of her butt and the suggestive sway of her hips in the catsuit as she walks."
There are a lot of women out there who sway their hips while walking. It not something only females in video games do, for a lot of them do it, just go out into the public and see for yourself.
We shouldn't ban these types of games from our children because it's not really gonna change anything. There's both females with short and revealing clothes in both video games and the public
It's been a great debate pro, i apologize for forfeiting round 2.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.