@Distinctive_Fin If Carolyn Petit ran the world then maxi pads would be marketed towards men because not doing so and targeting specific customer, why, that would be sexist.
Remember when PS1 came out and Resident Evil was a launch game? Remember when Resident Evil had Jill Valentine as a protagonist.
Jill Valentine - strong, police officer (i.e. authority figure), level-headed, tough, independent, critical thinker, capable of saving the day on her own, etc. (before she sold out and bought her little black skirt). A real strong female role model for the little girls.
Remember when all the women out there found out about Jill and Resident Evil? Remember when all the feminist women in the world were like, "FINALLY! Just what I've been waiting for! A STRONG FEMALE ROLE MODEL protagonist in a video game! Another woman I can relate to and look up to and be proud of - as a woman. Now I can become the gamer I've always wanted to be but couldn't do it because of all the rank sexism in gaming!" It was like a total sea change in gaming. Totally changed everything and stuff.
@trollkind there have already been lots of examples in this thread of strong female role models in games, which were dismissed as "occasional instances" and not good enough, even though said characters have gotten entire games devoted to said characters.
Point being these strong female role models already exist and didn't bring about a sea-change in gaming, there was no new wave of chick gamers singing the praises of the "strong female role model" as if they were just sitting around waiting for one and THAT'S why they were never gamers in the past. No, Carolyn's problem seems to be not that they are strong female role models but that they are too sexy. She seems to think that a woman can be a strong role model or be a model but can't be both. Probably because she is neither.
Has it ever occurred to either of you that the game industry is perfectly aware of your concerns but just doesn't care? Why should it? Resources are finite and studios have to make decisions about who to appeal to. There is no one-size-fits-all model for all games to follow, they have to decide who the target is.
Has it ever occurred to either of you that you just aren't worth targeting? Has you ever thought that your concerns occupy a tiny niche and that marketing towards that niche just isn't worth it (i.e. isn't profitable)? My guess is no, and that you two seem to think you're entitled to see women portrayed in ways you deem acceptable. You're not.
Want to do something about it? Try giving the studios a reason to pay attention to you. Money talks. Show them there is a profitable niche there (i.e. feminist) because as it stands they - i.e. the STUDIOS that MAKE GAMES - OBVIOUSLY don't see one.
Why don't you show them otherwise? Make a game that appeals to the niche you've described. Oh, wait, appealing to your narrow niche and satisfying your needs would not be considered "good enough" for either of you.
Having your niche satisfied just isn't enough. No, you and Anita want to change gaming AS A WHOLE. Of course, what the two of you perceive as "mak[ing] games and gaming overall better" is totally vague and undefined, I guess we're just supposed to take your word for it? How do you even define better in this instance? What does better even mean?
Oh, I know, you - Carolyn - define better as "whatever Carolyn and Anita perceive as 'better'".
@beast70 because there aren't any. They all have "boob" and curves and sometimes may even wear "boy shorts" and things like that. All stuff self-respecting women are appalled by and would never strive for or wear, except when they're at the club flaunting it in between their "feminist studies" classes.
IrrationalBeast's comments