Women on the Cards

[MelindatheMom]

I am concerned because Super Munchkin, which is marked for "Ages 10 & Up", contains a number of cards which are demeaning to women. "The Flasher" is particularly concerning because it makes light of that type of attack on women. As a victim of an indecent exposure, I can assure you that it is not pleasant or something to be taken lightly. Other cards cause women to be seen as objects.

I also feel it is completely unnecessary to expose pre-and early- adolescents to pole dancers, men drooling because they can see through a woman's clothing and extreme cleavage. I do understand however that there are differing views on what children should see.

I found about a dozen cards that I had to remove before allowing my early teenage son to use the game. I am not sure how this will affect play.

I strongly suggest that a higher age recommendation be printed on the game.

I ask that you remove "The Flasher" (and any similar cards) altogether.

[LordArach]

http://forums.sjgames.com/showthread...ghlight=sexist

[Eben]

I believe that other players have removed cards that have humor that may be inappropriate for younger players. Any person may remove cards they object to from their own decks.

[Eben]

You could always use the cards as a way to discuss stereotypes and the like?

[emillang1000]

Speaking as an animator and comic artist here, I have to defend the inclusion of those cards, as part of what Super Munchkin is parodying IS the shear amount of "fanservice" in comics.

Take any superhero comic - you will find, almost without fail, that the women portrayed are buxomy and with skin-tight or very revealing clothing. And these are comics aimed at "children" (personally, I'd argue that comics are better suited for teens these days, and most comics companies would agree, as almost all of the "mainstay" comics like Spider-Man, Superman, X-Men, and Batman are all rated "Teen" or higher). At the same time, MEN are portrayed as muscular, and (while maybe not showing as much skin) nearly all also wear very tight/revealing clothing/armor.

Consider Wonder Woman - perhaps the poster-child for this argument. She is, has been, and (for the immediate future) always will be portrayed in a strapless girdle/breastplate and bloomers. This is a little on the ridiculous side, as its obviously just showing off as much of her body as possible, and provides little to no armor for her. At the same time, Wonder Woman IS an Amazon, a Greek demi-god, and her culture would breed her to not think twice about not being proud of and displaying her body (or, frankly, fighting in the nude, as was the custom in pankration). So while she is obviously objectified for reader stimulation, it also oddly fits her character (that being said, I've often wished they'd make her costume more like a muscle-cuirass and replace her bloomers with pteruges, to befit a more "Greek" feel).

Part of this is to appeal to superhero comics' target audience: young men, generally aged 12 to 21. It's a fool's wish to believe that young men of this age WOULDN'T be interested in sex, and while I would prefer that they read comics more for the deep stories and interesting characters, I begrudgingly understand that you often have to entice them to read in the first place with the promise of shapely chests and hips.

This isn't to say that women don't read superhero comics as well, but they generally do consume less than men (on the flipside, women ARE more prone to buying graphic novels, and especially manga); and the authors and artists aren't dismissive of this, either, often employing just as much objectification of male characters who're popular with women as they do female characters who're popular with men - Gambit of X-Men, Bruce Wayne, and Tony Stark are notorious for walking around in very little clothing when not in-costume (artists will honestly find excuses for these characters to take their shirts off whenever possible to appeal to women).

"Sex sells." It's true - in advertising, in comics, in movies, books, television, everything. And both men AND women equally buy into it. The difference, however, is what men and women respond to: men are typically more visually-minded, whereas women are more psychologically minded (that being so, men are still aroused psychologically and women visually, but these are only their secondary modes of arousal). Superhero comics, being generally short and very visually-based stories, tend to appeal more to men, and as such sexy women are shown more often. But remember how I said that women consume more graphic novels and manga? Guess what THOSE are rife with: brooding men, confident men, mysterious men - all the things women find arousing, and they all happen to be very good looking as well.

Sexualization of characters is a part of comics culture. It's not the proudest part, but it is a part. I can't say it's a shame, either, frankly - most artists do take a modicum of pride when complimented on how attractive a character of theirs is, as it stands as a mark of quality for their art, and their ability to affect their audience.

I will agree, however, that it IS egregious. If it's not a cop-out on the artists' part (if artists can't make a character look interesting, especially a female character, they usually default to "well, make 'em look sexy at least"), then it will have been the editors/executives decision, who only care about churning out more comics and making more money than creating characters with sensible wardrobes.

---

Now, to pose a measure of counter-argument: my question to you is, "would you not let your child watch old 1930s & 1940s cartoons?" for the same reason.

A series of classic Warner Bros. cartoons features "Red Hot Riding Hood" and "Wolfy" - you may remember these, as they're some of the most famous cartoons ever made, not for the sexualization, but for codifying many standards of animated comedy such as bug-eyes, jaws literally dropping to the floor, etc., and establishing Tex Avery as one of the greatest animation directors of all time.

Equally, there is Betty Boop, who was the original cartoon sex symbol. By today's standards, her "risque" actions don't even register on peoples' radars, but in her day she drew a lot of flack for poor Max Fleischer for how unabashedly sexualized she was.

I, personally, would never even consider censoring these cartoons from my children. Regardless of their sexualized nature, they show no direct nudity, they are beautifully animated, and above all else are quite hilarious. Of all the things in this world and in the media which I'd like to shield children from - hate-filled protests in the news, bigotry-spewing "news anchors" on a certain channel which shall go unnamed, etc. - human sexuality registers very low on my list.

---

I don't believe, in the least, that things like one or two cards in a comedic card game are going to teach a child that it's okay to only be concerned with how attractive someone else is and not care about them as a person, ESPECIALLY when those cards are making fun of just how shameless superhero comics - which any child can just walk into a comic shop, pick up, and start reading - are with sex. On the contrary, it may end up only teaching them that sex isn't a scary thing and just a normal - if, objectively, funny when you really think about the whole mechanics of it - part of life. If a child is so easily influenced as to see a single card and decide "hey, it's okay to treat women like garbage because they're only worth what they look like" then the fault lies with their upbringing, not with a piece of art which is intended to be parodist.

[Andrew Hackard]

To the original poster: thank you for your thoughtful and respectful comments. We fully support the rights of parents to remove any cards from the Munchkin games that would clash with their own or their families' values; in fact, we encourage it, because we think that families playing games together is beneficial for everyone. Because everyone's values are slightly different, we think it would be a mistake for us to describe too narrow a circle around what we consider "acceptable."

Super Munchkin, in particular, is a parody of four-color superhero comics. Part of the parody is to shine a light on some of the tropes of this genre which are less enlightened, even unrealistic. Oversexualized female portrayals (and equally unrealistic male portrayals -- muscles just don't look like they're drawn sometimes!) are, for good or ill, one of the most commonly encountered features of superhero comics. If your son is a fan of comic books, then he's almost certainly seen art just as sexualized as that found in our game -- more so, probably, because comics these days strive for a realistic style (if not realistic effects!) and we're aiming at cartoons instead.

All that said, I will certainly pass your concerns along to Steve and the rest of the Munchkin team for further discussion.

To all other posters: we require equal civility from ALL participants in the conversation. I regret to say that I've had to edit some comments to achieve that goal. If I need to return to this thread for more such editing, infractions or even temporary bans will be the result.

[MangoTru7h]

I had similar concerns when I introduced my kid sister to Munchkin. Star Munchkin seems to have less family un-friendly cards (in my opinion) than other sets. I thought about removing maybe two or three cards but I left them in the end.

Its totally cool to customize your deck. I would even consider ordering some blank Munchkin cards and making your own to fill any systematic gameplay gaps.

[MelindatheMom]

Thanks, everyone.

I was unaware of the parody aspect, so this has been an education and I begin to see where the producers are coming from.

My son doesn't read many comic books. He reads mostly fantasy -- Lord of the Rings, etc for pleasure with some Manga thrown in. We don't even get channels on our TV -- we only just got one of those devices recently. He has, however, seen Popeye and Betty Boop. (We avoid hate-spewing mascarading as news at all costs.)

My son actually participated in choosing the cards to remove and we did discuss them. We did not, by any means, remove all the cards with large breasts or cleavage and we did leave the ones that change a character's gender. I agree that it would take more than a few cards in a game to skew a person's thoughts, but some of this just seemed excessive in this case. Although, as a parody, it makes sense to a point.

I am much more concerned by the more sexually aggressive cards like "Cleavage Stun" and, especially, "The Flasher."

Thanks for the information on costumizing decks and for the helpful responses. And thank you, administrator, for removing uncivil comments before I saw them and passing on my concerns to the team.

[morleydotes]

If I may? A Black Sharpe is a parents buddy for cards that offend. I have a set that I use at the boys and girls club, lots of cards are edited.

Pat

[MelindatheMom]

Oh that's an idea, too.

I really do think the game is creative, fun, and well-designed. I just also think some of the humor is bit "old" for the pre/early teen set.

Thanks.