That depends on what your argument is. I'm sorry to say but you are not framing them very well.
For example, one of my positions on this is that art should not be controlled. That creators should be allowed to freely express whatever they envision and that famous artists will be those whos work a lot of people agree is worth their money and attention.
So no, when I say artists should be free to create what they want, I am not doing the same thing as you when you start rambling about how you find certain types of art somehow problematic.
Ofc you can voice your opinion that you think its wrong that some things tied to human sexuality happen to be popular.
But unless you bring any convincing arguments I am going to call you out for having poor arguments.
So lets hear it more clearly, why exactly is wrong with having some forms of artistic media present women in a sexually appealing way.
(and before you settle for the "because it creates bla bla stereotype X about women) keep in mind what I said about women helping to create and popularize these views of female sexuality. If you are going to argue that a game creates this view of women, you need to:
A) describe why that is wrong, and how it is not sexist by you to assume women do not have any meaningfull agency in how their sexuality is expressed in culture.
B) show the connection. If your argument is this you need to somehow demonstrate that games actually does cause whtever it is you think they cause.
But lets hear your actual arguments. Perhaps this isnt at all the direction you were heading in.
Way to backpedal.
Why should I have to re-phrase my arguments for you when I have been doing that this whole time? I've spent enough time arguing with you about this as it is, I'm not about to go on another long speech so that you can finally understand what I'm saying. I don't want to have to repeat everything I've said just because you've failed to see where myself and those who think like me are coming from.
EDIT: And of course I went on another long speech. bleh.
I mean Ayvah, the person contributing most to the thread, has provided argument upon argument and proof upon proof but none of it seems to resonate with those who disagree. S/he has more than addressed all the questions you're asking here and yet you still require more explanation.
I'm respectfully agreeing to disagreeing.
I will say, though, that there is nothing wrong with having sexual undertones present in video games. I believe that video games can be understood as an art form, and as an art form video games should be free to express any part of the human experience, including sexuality.
The problem with the way the gaming industry depicts sexuality is that it (sexuality),
1) Tends to be emphasized on female characters over male characters. (I emphasize tends here because there clearly are sexualized male characters as well).
2) Tends to be used as a cheap advertising tactic to get straight male gamers to purchase a game. How many game advertisements have you seen with a semi-naked female character enticing you to try the game out?
3) It is at times the only defining trait or at least the most defining trait of a female character. Ivy from Soul Calibur? Quiet from MGSV?
4) Contributes to the idea that a female character can only be interesting if she looks sexually attractive.
5) Tends to be used in an unrealistic fashion i.e. bikini chain-mail armor.
6) Limits diversity in body types and shapes for women. At least if we assume that "sexy" is defined as being skinny with large breasts, which I think is the idea of sexy that most devs and consumers focus on.
7) Is typically not used to create female characters with a sexual agenda of their own, but as characters whose looks indicate that they can and should be exploited by the main character.
I could list a few more but these are the ones that jump out at me. Feel free to disagree with me on any of these points, but at least for now I'm stepping away from this discussion.
