Patch 5.3 interview with Ghostcrawler
Mystery of the Unborn Val'kyr
The latest patch 5.3 news
All of the latest Mists of Pandaria newsNoblegarden: Sexy or Sexist?
by Robin Torres 
May 1st 2009 at 1:00PM
We are nearing the end of Noblegarden, but haven't discussed here at WoW Insider the most controversial part of the event: Shake your Bunny-Maker. For this achievement, you have to put bunny ears on one female of each race that is over Level 18.
Before we go any farther in this discussion, I would like to state that I am female. Not that I am speaking for all females (no one can), but I think that it is important that you know where I am coming from. I also have a young daughter and would like the world to be a better place for her, as all parents do. It is also worth noting that the title for this post was inspired by one of my favorite movies: This is Spinal Tap. The band wants to release an album called Smell the Glove with a cover of a naked woman who is leashed and is forced to smell a glove. The lead singer mistakes the word "sexist" for "sexy". Hilarity ensues.
Before we go any farther in this discussion, I would like to state that I am female. Not that I am speaking for all females (no one can), but I think that it is important that you know where I am coming from. I also have a young daughter and would like the world to be a better place for her, as all parents do. It is also worth noting that the title for this post was inspired by one of my favorite movies: This is Spinal Tap. The band wants to release an album called Smell the Glove with a cover of a naked woman who is leashed and is forced to smell a glove. The lead singer mistakes the word "sexist" for "sexy". Hilarity ensues.
The name and picture of that fictional album is undeniably sexist and degrading to women. But does that apply to the in-game actions of forcing bunny ears on appropriately "aged" females? Sutro at Feministing.com seems to think so (as do a few of our readers who wrote in about this topic). He calls this achievement "unconscionable", which is a pretty strong word.
Without a doubt, putting the ears only on female characters and having them be the equivalent of legal age to pose nude is a reference to Playboy. And Playboy, as most adults know, is a men's magazine with naked women inside AKA smut or porn. Many people believe that all porn objectifies and is otherwise demeaning to women, even if considered tasteful as many consider Playboy to be.
But while the female characters have no choice as to wearing the bunny ears, which Sutro says makes many female players feel uncomfortable in real life, they are not stripped down into a Playboy Bunny outfit or otherwise affected in any other way. So this really comes down to knowing what the reference is and being bothered by it.
On the one hand, anyone who doesn't know it's a Playboy reference, such as children, just think it's fun to put bunny ears on other players like they forced pumpkins on players' heads during Hallow's End. It is just bunny ears to them and is innocent fun. Other people enjoy the pop culture reference and also mean no harm when participating in the event.
Personally, I wish they had left the gender and level restrictions out of the achievement. Being "forced" to wear bunny ears doesn't bother me at all and I am having a good time in Noblegarden, but I don't think this was the smartest decision Blizzard has ever made. (Edited to add: I tried to present both sides of the topic here, but if you are interested in my full, unbridled opinion, I've expounded on my personal blog.)
| Yes, they should change the achievement to be any gender and level. | |
|---|---|
| Yes, the achievement should be removed. | |
| No, it's all in good fun. | |
| Not in this day and age. | |
| Bunnies are cute! |
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Events, Virtual selves, Achievements
Reader Comments (Page 4 of 19)
mcclary May 1st 2009 2:00PM
I am a male who enjoys females who enjoy the female form. Just sayin'.
Michael May 1st 2009 2:28PM
^This.
robert May 1st 2009 1:13PM
No its all good its all in fun no one wants to make people dress in bunny suits and walk around struting thier stuff.All this achive is is to make people feel more involved in the holiday.you can turn people into bunnys so why not just go ehh lets put just ears,there is really not to much wrong its just a refference and people have fun with those.
bmiller May 1st 2009 1:11PM
There's such a fine line between stupid and clever ...
Xerone May 1st 2009 1:13PM
One thing that WoW has taught me is you can't please everyone.
Glaras May 1st 2009 1:10PM
I skipped the entire Noblegarden thing. Too much camping of eggs, too much sniping. I was grinding rep and herbalism in Teldrassil on day 1 of the holiday, and the venom being spat around by all those campers was enough to make be /leave the channel.
Good riddance to the entire holiday.
Arashikou May 1st 2009 2:22PM
You really should go back and try it again now. The holiday lasts a week, but is doable in a day, in hopes that people will pace themselves instead of feeling like they have to rush to complete everything ASAP. Of course, that didn't happen - as you saw. But once the people in a tizzy to get it done in a day passed through, (which happened by Tuesday maintenance, by my reckoning) the newbie towns became significantly more palatable and friendly as the population of people fighting for eggs dropped.
kaujot May 1st 2009 1:13PM
I'm sorry, but the people at Feministing have a long history of over-reacting to everything.
The Playboy connection NEVER occurred to me. You know why? Because Noblegarden is a WoW equivalent to the secular Easter. What happens in the secular portion of Easter? People hunt for the Easter Bunny.
I just assumed the "only on females of a certain level" was to make it more difficult (as in, find a female troll) and so that people couldn't just roll a new female troll and sit in Dalaran for a week.
kaujot May 1st 2009 1:14PM
To clarify: people hunt for eggs left by the Easter Bunny. Regardless, there's a rabbit motif moving throughout the whole celebration.
Voxrath May 1st 2009 1:13PM
It's all in good fun to me, and in this day and age practicly anything go's. Personly Hustler is more like smut, atlest Playboy makes the girls look pretty and elegent...
SINisterWyvern May 1st 2009 1:17PM
Hustler is porn
Playboy is erotica
Omestes May 1st 2009 3:10PM
Hustler is smut, Playboy is airbrushed to the point where it doesn't matter if they have real women posing or not.
Thats the one thing I always hated about Playboy, I've never met a woman who was so creepily perfect in my life (they don't exist). I say creepy because human skin is not a perfectly uniform, wrinkeless expanse completely lacking in pore or freckle. Why bother even having women pose anymore? Why not use CG? Its not like anyone could tell the difference.
That said, this "debate" is dumb. Men are as evil as women in the objectification war. My friend is in the Navy, and I got to listen to her GUSH about Marines for 7 straight days. Not how nice their personalities were, not that they were stand up individuals, but that they were hulking mounds of man sex. Women have male strippers, male porn mags, and large libidos of their own. But for some reason only men are bad.
Actually, it might be because men enjoy it on a certain level. How many Marines reading the previous paragraph smiled a bit? How many wanted to meet her? :) Actually, women enjoy it too. Go tell your girlfriend that she is the most beautiful girl in the world, and buy her some sexy bed-wear. It will make both of your nights. ;p
Docp May 1st 2009 1:12PM
People who find this offensive need to grow up and learn to take a joke. It's a one time reference to pop culture. You can push a point too far and any feminist who seriously tried to attack Blizzard with this would probably do more harm than good.
The Hammer May 1st 2009 1:12PM
Oh-oh, is that the smell of a freshly-opened can o' worms?!
I admit I gawked at the achievement. But then, when the Queen of Dragons wears what she does, this sorta stuff doesn't really come as a surprise. Objectification of women in videogames still, unfortunately, happens, and considering the wide array of females who play WOW, it's a shame that Blizzard hasn't latched on to the fact that they could be alienating 50 percent of the world's population, and instead catering to people (a perhaps imaginary set of people) to whom scantily-dressed women are a criteria for deciding who to give their 9 pound a month to.
Super Marxio May 1st 2009 1:16PM
It is similarly sexist to assume that women find scanty clothing offensive. My wife, for example, very much enjoys a somewhat revealing outfit in WoW. As long as scanty and modest clothing are both available, I think the most feminist option is to allow intelligent, adult women to make their own decisions, and not presume to tell them what alienates them.
The Hammer May 1st 2009 1:24PM
Yeah, but note that I said "could be alienating" rather than "are". I'm under no illusions that there is any hivemind (clearly there isn't, as males can debate about sexism to and fro, like thus).
As for there being a wide range of different types of clothing, that's OK, sure. But 1) you can't do that with NPC characters, and 2) there is a lot of battle armour which is simply impractical in the game, which, when you show it on a male, is a totally different case. Slim-cut dresses and suchlike? Sure, because they fit the context, but armour which is so lacking it's basically a bra? Whether or not females would find it alienating, it's still objectifying, and it is still setting a very definitive difference between male and female avatars. IE men are competent and pragmatic in their wearing of armour, and women's curves are accentuated, as is the bare flesh which could be impaled by any weapon.
Super Marxio May 1st 2009 1:34PM
I don't find any arguments about practicality of armor in this game very persuasive. Nothing on either gender looks particularly realistic. Have you seen some of the shoulder gear?
There is a point to be made about the vast differences between armor on men and women. Speaking on a purely anecdotal level, most women I know who play the game prefer the more revealing armor, and claim the more "realistic" gear is frumpy or too masculine. Of course, there is a reasonable limit. None of them like thong armor, for example.
Perhaps there is insufficient audience demand for tiny male clothing? I can't imagine that Blizzard would have a problem producing it if people wanted it.
On the subject of NPCs, I feel that many of the male Orcs are lightly clothed. A cultural difference?
DanH May 2nd 2009 3:55PM
"I don't find any arguments about practicality of armor in this game very persuasive. Nothing on either gender looks particularly realistic. Have you seen some of the shoulder gear?"
It's two different standards of "realism".
The armour for guys is unrealistic in a way that is designed to make male characters look more badass. The armour for girls is unrealistic in a way that is designed to make them more appealing for men to look at.
So you wind up with a situation where male characters are designed for fulfill male fantasies ("I want to be this guy!") and female characters are designed to fulfill male fantasies ("I want to have sex with this chick!").
Now, having said that, WoW PC models are actually alright in that they have a reasonable number of actually-tough-looking females (Tauren females in particular look like they could actually lamp you one) but most of the game is still designed around the assumption of a male audience.
Rhoe May 1st 2009 1:17PM
Apparently there's this crazy new feature called removing self buffs. You guys should run a feature about it, I heard its all the rage.
Todd May 1st 2009 1:13PM
Meow!