If it's as harmless as sexism goes. Then why even say anything?

It's still sexism. And therefore wrong.

Quite frankly, I find the fact that you call her a prize to be sexist. She's a human being in need of help, and you're calling her a prize. THAT'S sexist.

Holy crap it's like arguing the bible with someone who has never read it. You clearly haven't read a single word of feminist theory.

The game sets her up as the end goal prize. NINTENDO, not me, has created a character that, mechanically, is no different to a soccer goal.

What injustice? There is NO injustice here, at all, whatsoever. We're talking about Super Mario here. A video game. GAME. And you're taking it seriously. Yes, you need to lighten up.

Yes. A GAME. GAMES are the biggest revenue earner of the entertainment industries now. People call GAMES "art" now. GAME DEVELOPERs get to be celebrities now. More people recognise Mario, a GAME character, than Mickey Mouse.

GAMES are important. The role GAMES play in society is important. Sexism in GAMES is a real problem.

I can see how you can consider Super Princess Peach sexist, but she's a princess. Princess' are spoiled. Therefore she fits the character.

Hello stereotypes! Hello SEXISM! Congratulations, you are now defending sexism by being sexist. This is usually the point where debate becomes about as painful as self castration, but what can I say? I dislike offensive opinions.

I see nothing wrong with any of that.

Of course you wouldn't. You're not aware of feminist theory, or likely most other forms of sociology, and you don't really understand the issues here.

Parents can buy whatever they want for their kids. When you have a boy, you can buy him a dress and dolls if you want. Just be prepared to have him get made fun of a lot. Right or wrong, it's the reality, and it's why most parents go along with it.

Oh no, there's no "right" here. It's "wrong," or at least would be except we have a wonderfully ignorant society that likes to tell enlightened people that they should take games less seriously.

There are far worse things to worry about. I see nothing wrong with parents wanting their children to fit in and be normal.

That's because you can't see that "normal," is what's wrong here. "Normal" is reinforcing sexist social attitudes.

I can stand you daring. I just find it ridiculous. There is no imbalance. Nintendo has Super Mario. Nintendo has Metroid. Balance.

Metroid is another sexist series. A game that rewards players for playing well with a half-naked woman is not promoting a healthy attitude towards women.

There are real issues that need to be dealt with in this world. This world has a lot of bad in it. The story, or lack thereof, in a video game is not a real issue and is literally harmless.

There are real issues in this world, yes. When the most important art form is telling kids that girls should be defenceless cute prizes to earn by being a hero, then it becomes a real issue.

Time you woke up and realised just how important games are in this world, I think.

If the one of the major things you have to worry about for your child is what they think about a video game

I'm pretty sure one of the major things I will worry about my children is their attitudes towards men and women.

If there is any issue here at all, it's that parents allow their children to be so heavily influenced by the media. That's an issue of parenting, not Super Mario's story.

I'm pretty sure the ethics lecturers and philosophers out there know better than you do. And when they decide that the artist is responsible for the material they produce, then I'm on their side.

I'm going to make you a suggestion here - rather than come up with a bunch of opinions that are entirely based on your gut feeling, go and do some reading on the following topics; feminism, sociology (especially semantics), social ethics, corporate responsibility and psychology.

At least then if you want to continue the debate you might have something to back your opinions up.

Getting to choose Mario or Peach? Making Bowser bi-sexual?? That'd be a revolution in gaming, if not, mass entertainment

@DudeSean @LollipopChoSaw Might I recommend that you guys meditate for a few minutes and back away from the computer for a few minutes as well?

For what it's worth, I always assumed Bowser swung both ways. The dude has an unhealthy obsession in pulling stunts to encourage Mario to chase him down.

Granted, it's unrequited.

Calling Nintendo sexist is so 2010
Also awesome I posted on my favorite number

Also, do the newer Metroid games even have the traditional "reward" for speedrunning? (Honestly, I don't know)

You're the one being sexist here. Not the game. Why is it wrong for a woman and a man to have romantic moments? Clearly Peach already likes him besides him being his rescuer, as she asks him over for cake.

You are way off on your calculations of how many games reinforce that mentality. Most games don't even touch on the subject. I could be here all day listing off games that don't "reinforce" that mentality.

lol. "Resorting." In case you haven' noticed, I have a plethora of reason to choose from as to why it's ridiculous.
Perhaps we should focus our concerns on bigger problems instead of infantile problems like this.

Mario 2 being a dream doesn't dismiss the fact that it still portrayed the Princess in a role other than a damsel in distress. You're just using the dream bit as an excuse not to count it.
Samus was shown in a bikini in ONE Metroid game. And, c'mon, it's gotta be hot in that suit. It's only realistic that she wouldn't need much clothing underneath.
Zelda has never impersonated a guy. Sheik was androgynous so you wouldn't know if it was a man or a woman, just making sheik's identity all the more a mystery.
I mentioned a few games where a female is a hero and not a damsel in distress. All you have is Mario and Zelda. So... while I didn't mention many, it is more than you.
It's funny how Samus is pretty much the opposite of a "damsel in distress" in Metroid, and yet it's still considered sexist.
Does it really matter if you play as a guy or a girl? When I play as a female in a game, I don't get upset that I don't have the choice to play as a male.

Holy shnikes, man. Don't equate what I was saying to parents disowning their children. You call it "reinforcing stereotypes" but they're just doing what they know. It's easy to look down on people, but it's a whole different story to actually be a better person than them.
Samus is way more of a badass than Mario is, so I really don't see your point on how video games need to create strong, rational females when they already exist and have for a long time.

It's not sexism. It's not wrong.

No, I haven't. Nor do I care to. I'm not rooting for one gender or another. I'm rooting for people in general. I don't believe in special treatment either way.

That's your view. Do you not understand that? It's your point of view that is askew.

Sexism in games is not a real problem. If we are learning from video games, or books, or tv, or whatever, then that's our fault, not the media's fault. You can't just blame the media for problems. We are responsible for ourselves.

You're funny. A spoiled, rich person acting like a spoiled rich, person is sexist?

Okay. Now you're hilarious. You're "enlightened" because you consider Super Mario Bros. to be sexist? Yeah, I guess I'm just too ignorant to be up in arms about Super Mario Bros.

No matter what "normal" is, someone is going to have an opinion that it is wrong. But what's normal now is at least better than it used to be. Normal may not be your "right" but it's not bad. You wanna see bad, go back one or two hundred years. We're not calling women witches and burning them at the stake anymore. But being portrayed as a victim in a CARTOON VIDEO GAME is something to be upset about...

That's ONE game in the Metroid series. The system was not capable of detailed graphics. They had to make her look like a woman so people would know for a fact that she was a woman and not just a feminine looking male.

I don't view video games as art. I agree with Miyamoto on the subject.
Super Mario Bros. does not tell kids that girls "should be [defenseless] cute prizes." It teaches people to do the right thing, whether it's easy or not. The right thing to do, the good thing to do, the brave thing to do, is to save the kingdom's princess. Everyone wants to be the good, brave hero. It's just a fact that young women are the most cared for people in the world. Having the person to save be a princess only makes people care more. No matter how you feel about that, it's a fact.

I think you need to realize that people should be responsible for their own thoughts, feelings and actions and not blame it on the media. You can't just demand that the media does things your way just to make you happy. That's selfish and ridiculous.

Then talk to your children about it. Don't ask Nintendo to change what they're doing. If someone had a different opinion of you, like myself, you probably wouldn't take to kindly to demanding you to live your life by my rules. Why would you do that to someone else?

So you're just a follower and don't think for yourself? Apparently they don't have you really convinced because if they changed their mind you would blindly follow.

I already have things to back my opinions up with. Life experience and education. Which I'm sure you do as well. Hence this being a debate in the first place.

Even if video game developers make female characters the leading role, people STILL call it sexist because they make her too attractive or whatever. What do you people want? Half of the video games have you play as a strong, ugly woman?

@LollipopChoSaw
At the risk of sounding malignant (which is my very last intention), why should Mario go out of its way to portray an image of gender equality? You refer to the depictions of females in the Mario series as “wrong” and that the gaming industry needs to be more “balanced”. Thing is, there are plenty of other religious and political agendas that would be neglected in favour of the type of depictions you seek. Your point of view regarding the role of females is merely one of a segment of society, yet (correct me if I’m wrong) you appear to place it on a pedestal above other viewpoints such as Islam, Christianity, the massively differentiating views of agnosticism, etc.

The roles of both genders vary greatly upon cultures. There is no one global outlook in which women and men are considered equals. Nintendo Life and the entire video game industry are full of people from all over the world from different walks of life. The views you wish to spread are not necessarily “wanted” by the populace playing the Mario franchise. I would expect some extremists or vengeful groups to get uppity about “shoving ideals down the throats of children” or some such. I puzzle you this: do people play Mario for thought-provoking insight into today’s society?

“Balance” is impossible to achieve without inflammation. Meanwhile, you yourself dislike “offensive opinions” but wish to spread viewpoints that some would view as offensive. Are there not people who would be offended by your views?

Perhaps the success of the main-series Mario franchise is due to its fairytale-like simplicity. One could easily view it as sexist because according to the dictionary definition of the word, it very much is. There’s absolutely no debate. You stated yourself that people may not consciously consider this, however. Therefore, the current “ignorance” may be bliss for the masses. I believe this lack of thought contributes to its success in many countries, since people view it as a black and white story of the good guy saving the girl from the bad guy or simply overlook that due to the gameplay.

This may not be the best example, but you seem to be like a Christian offended that he walked into a bar full of homosexuals. Such activities are perfectly legal in many parts of the world. Scientists have endeavoured to prove there is no major medical issue with it. That doesn’t make our theoretical individual any less shocked or offended.

I can understand the desire for the gaming industry to evolve and portray other viewpoints. I sympathize. Thing is, yours is simply another one in a long line of ideals that have yet to make a splash on the games industry in any meaningful way. That’s not to belittle you or even say there are bigger things we should deal with – I’m just putting that out there.

So, I’m not opposed to expanding the way females are depicted in video games. It’s very much a one dimensional view at the moment. I’d love to see various ideals be incorporated into the stories of a myriad of titles. I’m simply wondering whether Mario is the appropriate catalyst. The franchise is a worldwide success. Do you firmly believe this change would be beneficial to the franchise? That's not rhetorical either, as I would genuinely like to hear about it.

Time to take out the reading glasses,its a novel here.

Samus was shown in a bikini in ONE Metroid game.

Five, actually. If you count the remake of the first game. Not that I'm reading your ranty posts, I just wanted to point that out

...Too lazy to read all of this...o.0

I really hope you are all joking, this is hilarious. It reminds me of when PETA claimed that Super Mario promoted the killing of tanookis.

No, I haven't. Nor do I care to. I'm not rooting for one gender or another. I'm rooting for people in general. I don't believe in special treatment either way.

For this reason alone I'm not going to bother responding to you. I say "go out and learn about feminism first" and you refuse.

For the record, feminist theory has nothing to do with "rooting for one gender or another." It concerns itself with the way gender (male and female) is portrayed and exploited in society and the media. When it is critical, it is critical because it rails against inaccurate stereotypes, both male and female, good and bad.

One day you'll learn that personal experience means nothing when debating social issues. When that happens I'll be happy to debate with you again.

At the risk of sounding malignant (which is my very last intention), why should Mario go out of its way to portray an image of gender equality? You refer to the depictions of females in the Mario series as “wrong” and that the gaming industry needs to be more “balanced”. Thing is, there are plenty of other religious and political agendas that would be neglected in favour of the type of depictions you seek. Your point of view regarding the role of females is merely one of a segment of society, yet (correct me if I’m wrong) you appear to place it on a pedestal above other viewpoints such as Islam, Christianity, the massively differentiating views of agnosticism, etc.

I think I'm going to like you.

My personal belief (and this is how this whole debate got started) is that the <i>fact</i> that the Mario games are sexist means that Nintendo <i>should</i> take steps to modernise the gender message they're sending out. The sexism is undeniable, what is arguable is whether Nintendo should, or shouldn't, do something about it. I fall on the latter side of things.

What follows after that is simply my reasons for it - like anything else when it comes to philosophy and sociology there are counter-arguments to my general point of view. "Mario is not sexist," is not one, though, because that's like arguing the world is flat.

The roles of both genders vary greatly upon cultures. There is no one global outlook in which women and men are considered equals. Nintendo Life and the entire video game industry are full of people from all over the world from different walks of life. The views you wish to spread are not necessarily “wanted” by the populace playing the Mario franchise. I would expect some extremists or vengeful groups to get uppity about “shoving ideals down the throats of children” or some such. I puzzle you this: do people play Mario for thought-provoking insight into today’s society?

No. but people don't necessarily read a Shakespeare play and then launch into a 5000-word thesis on whether Hamlet was really insane or just playing. The point I'm making here is that any work of art - and the Mario games are an example of interactive art - can be taken at a surface level, or analysed more deeply.

I analyse stuff, it's how I get my kicks out of games and such - understanding them and all that. A theme doesn't need to exist on the surface of a game for it to be applicable. Art analysis is always subjective, but it's possible to be accurate, and inaccurate. I've never been inaccurate.

So in other words - you don't need to agree with me, and given my upbringing, cultural context and age, my opinion is of course going to be different to a 16-year old from the US, but my reading of the Mario games is not incorrect.

“Balance” is impossible to achieve without inflammation. Meanwhile, you yourself dislike “offensive opinions” but wish to spread viewpoints that some would view as offensive. Are there not people who would be offended by your views?

While I am a relativist, there are certain things that are universally considered to be evil (or offensive). Sexism is one of them. In a very weird way, even places like Saudi Arabia and Iran and firmly against sexism - it's just that they come from a perspective we consider very alien and quite sexist.

I do, however, know for a fact that almost everyone at NintendoLife is from westernised nations, and therefore the definition and application of "sexism" is universal amongst us.

Perhaps the success of the main-series Mario franchise is due to its fairytale-like simplicity. One could easily view it as sexist because according to the dictionary definition of the word, it very much is. There’s absolutely no debate. You stated yourself that people may not consciously consider this, however. Therefore, the current “ignorance” may be bliss for the masses. I believe this lack of thought contributes to its success in many countries, since people view it as a black and white story of the good guy saving the girl from the bad guy or simply overlook that due to the gameplay.

And as I've already said, being critical of a game because it is sexist is not the same thing as saying it's a bad game. I like sexist games. It's impossible to be a gamer otherwise - unless the only game you play is Tetris (and perhaps Farmville).

That doesn't mean we should pretend the sexism doesn't exist.

This may not be the best example, but you seem to be like a Christian offended that he walked into a bar full of homosexuals. Such activities are perfectly legal in many parts of the world. Scientists have endeavoured to prove there is no major medical issue with it. That doesn’t make our theoretical individual any less shocked or offended.

We're talking about art here, not religion or sexuality. A better example would be this: head over to Akihabera in Japan at some stage, and track down a junior idol photo shoot. Go along to it. There you'll see a group of 10-20 men (ages roughly 16-40) taking photos of a 12-16 year old girl in a swimsuit.

If you're a healthy human being, you're going to be offended. And yet it's legal, and accepted by Japanese society (well, to an extent. It's not something the Japanese men that do it necessarily want their friends and family to know about). Do you accept it because it's part of the Japanese culture? Not really. You <i>should</i> be critical of Japan for allowing something like that to happen. But it doesn't mean you need to dislike Japan (or photography for that matter).

Similarly, I find the sexism in the Mario games offensive. I still like the character of Mario, and I still like the games (well, as much as I like any platformer).

I can understand the desire for the gaming industry to evolve and portray other viewpoints. I sympathize. Thing is, yours is simply another one in a long line of ideals that have yet to make a splash on the games industry in any meaningful way. That’s not to belittle you or even say there are bigger things we should deal with – I’m just putting that out there.

My viewpoint? Feminism and social theory isn't exactly a niche discipline of academic thought. There's already been plenty of examples of feminist games. There's no reason Nintendo can't do this as well.

Do you firmly believe this change would be beneficial to the franchise?

I actually do. It would be a relatively easy way to modernise the Mario franchise without compromising the classic gameplay. Win-win for everyone.

Only reaction I can bother to give this thread:

@dude sean said: I'm not rooting for one gender or another. I'm rooting for people in general. I don't believe in special treatment either way.

feminism is not about obtaining 'special treatment'; it's about equality. those of us, as rush would say, 'feminazis', who are old enough remember when it was assumed that a woman didn't need to earn as much as a man for the same job because 'well, he's the breadwinner'. girls were not encouraged to enter studies of higher math/the sciences. it wasn't that long ago.

the glass ceiling still exists. harassment on the job is still acceptable in many places because 'it's just joking around and no harm was meant'. there are scandals from the armed forces where female soldiers are being harassed and denied promotion if they refuse the advances of their superiors.

my cait used to get pissed that the princess seemed to just get kidnapped and then wait passively for rescue. she loved the games, but even at a young age sensed that the premise was a bit 'off'. she also always wondered how lara croft could manage to stay standing with the weight of her enormous boobs; tho cait thought they probably helped keep her afloat whenever she was in the water.

idk if mario sends any messages. but some of the responses here seem to be out of never-never land, imho. discrimination is often clouded by subtlety and behind a mask of humour. if not challenged it causes damage that victims aren't allowed to express because it's not important enough, they are just too sensitive or some other justification.

@ark: yep, i will put out a view for equality against any system that discriminates against others, be it Islam, Christianity, the KKK, whatever. mental illness is a basis for massive discrimination, that's just as wrong. i have lived long enough to understand that there will always be those who need power over others in order to feel better about themselves. it's not a good thing and needs to be recognised and fought where we can.

discrimination is rarely a true aspect of religion/culture: it is about power over others and the fear of losing it.

Actually about Super Mario Bros. 2, Subcon is an actual place. BS Super Mario USA mentions it's a Dream World. After the first game Wart escaped into another realm (Link's Awakening) but when he returned he overthrow the new King of Subcon, so he summoned Mario and friends to return once more using the power of the Star. The game is also canon with the rest of the series, Birdo gets tired of living there and escapes to Mario's world. Were he has been ever since.

@LolipopChoSaw
I do agree with a large portion of what you said, specifically that Mario is currently a sexist franchise in many respects (I did note this). A chunk also comes down to our personal opinions (and my decidedly lazy desire not to fill this page with any more quotes, yikes). However, this section jumped out at me:

While I am a relativist, there are certain things that are universally considered to be evil (or offensive). Sexism is one of them. In a very weird way, even places like Saudi Arabia and Iran and firmly against sexism - it's just that they come from a perspective we consider very alien and quite sexist.

Going by the Dictionary definition of sexism:

1.attitudes or behavior based on traditional stereotypes of sexual roles.
2.discrimination or devaluation based on a person's sex, as in restricted job opportunities; especially, such discrimination directed against women.

Sexism is present in Christianity. For example, women play different roles from men in the Church. It violates scripture for a woman to preach in front of an audience, which is in conflict with the second definition there. I won't be so arrogant as to say "the entirety America is a country founded on Christianity" (which isn't the case), but it accounts for approximately 2 billion of the 7+ billion people on our Earth. Obviously those numbers are skewed ridiculously high for my argument by various factors (i.e. people who would identify themselves as Christian despite passing or inherited belief, those who don't know about sexism etc.), but what you're left with is a decent chunk of genuine believers that are sexist if it is what they truly believe.

Islam is also a large religion that accounts for over 1.5 billion people. The Koran indisputably views women as "lesser". A woman's testimony is half the value of a man's, men have physical "ownership" over their (optionally multiple) partners, women are viewed as less intelligent, woman can be "donated", and perhaps not dissimilar to Mario, can be treated as "prizes". I do not mean any of this to be inflammatory (apologies if it seen that way), but it is factual, with references available.

Of course, your last bit there is a nice counterargument in that it raises the idea that people are unknowingly sexist despite being "against" sexism. Can't argue with that. What I do know is that anyone religious who actually pays attention to what they believe and is not just a number, is likely sexist in some respect. At least in the eyes of various forms of scripture, this "universal evil" is permitted and encouraged. Is that enough to warrant the "universal" title? You probably have a better idea of the two of us.

I think I'm going to like you.

That could change quickly

Sorry to mention this but the whole woman not being able to preach is a mis-translation or I mean the meaning was lost from the Hebrew. Using a Strong's' Concordance, Paul was talking to the woman who were chattering during the preaching. It means no one should be talking, man or woman, period, when someone is preaching the Word. They were being disruptive and if they learned anything at all.

Though I am not going to get into this any further and I shall leave this thread. Later everyone.

Just came in to catch up what's going on in this thread since I left for Uni... but there's no way I'm reading all that.

I suppose that if Mario was captured and rendered helpless (as in Super Princess Peach,) it is also sexist. But it isn't, at least not to most people. If Peach being captured is at all sexist, then the same should apply to Mario or anyone being captured.

I don't understand, this is a cartoon game. These are characters. They could make a game in which Mario who cannot escape from Bowser and yells Peach's name in a cute voice while Peach saves him. Not sexist, because it is a character, not reality. Not all men are dominant, aggressive heroes and not all women are any certain characterization. This is all just reaching so far for an issue it's ridiculous. It isn't even worth debate. It just bewilders me that some people actually find offense in a shallow, meaningless characterization. But I digress.

@Radixxs

Such a complaint about sexism in Mario games reminds me of the fuss PETA made about the Tanooki suit a while back. Ridiculous. There must be more worthy targets.