Making a character female can only be considered "arbitrary" if one considers the default decision to be making a character male, and making them female a conscious decision that requires additional justification.

This mentality is actually part of the problem.

I get what you're trying to say, but it doesn't make sense to me. What you are arguing for basically seems to be sexism in reverse. Does it require justification to make a character to male? That's what it seems like you're arguing for. You don't fix sexism by filling quotas, despite society's tendency to look at it that way.

I like Fillion, too, but what Destiny needed was more character development and interaction. That doesn't necessitate Nathan Fillion. I also like Claudia Black, and they've removed her from the game instead of expanding her role. The Exo Stranger is the best character in vanilla destiny, and she's been MIA since launch.

Yes, and we got more character development and interaction. It was Cayde because people pretty much universally love Fillion. It doesn't have anything to do with him being a man.

I love Claudia Black, too, at least as much as Fillion, if not moreso. Her appearance in Stargate was basically the only thing keeping me watching the show at that point. Tess Everis was removed to make features that fans have been requesting for ever. She wasn't removed because she was a woman; she was removed because of necessity and because Tess would be redundant with the new collection systems.

Also, it's really, really obvious we're going to see the Exo Stranger quite a bit more. It just hasn't happened yet.

This mentality is actually part of the problem.

Agreed. Having a default gender would be a problem. But remember what I said about weight of evidence? What evidence do you have that Bungie started with any default gender for any character?

I also like Claudia Black, and they've removed her from the game instead of expanding her role. The Exo Stranger is the best character in vanilla destiny, and she's been MIA since launch.

And the reasons for these things are...? In Destiny year one we saw the story move forward and bring in new characters and we've seen actors replaced due to time commitments. Will the Exo Stranger never be featured again because she is a woman? Did Claudia Black get removed because she was a woman?

It seems your default position is everyone is sexist and then maybe you consider alternatives. :(

I like Fillion, too, but what Destiny needed was more character development and interaction.

This is part of the reason why the number of men and women in Destiny doesn't matter. When I look at whether a work is sexist, I look at the overall message, theme, treatment of women, and attitudes towards them. When you have a game like Destiny, a game that isn't really about anything, you can't even really call it sexist at all, because it doesn't make any statements, explicit or implicit, about women. Everybody in the game is kind of just there.

It's worth noting that you immediately jump to "has MORE females than males" when the idea was having a believable balance.

I gave an exhaustive account both in terms of numbers across the game, and in terms of how the portrayals and situations are weakened. You keep reducing it to 2/3.

To be clear, I'm using the 1/3 v 2/3 example of the Vanguard leaders because it is the most clear and dramatic and easily understood example in the game. It's a place where your philosophy is most evident because an equal split of 3 people is impossible. To imply anything else is moving into a realm of grossly unsubstantiated speculation. I don't think you mean to do that, so let's move forward.

Some Destiny players are female and it's worth wondering why, if Bungie so chooses, the world of Destiny does not have a gender balance similar to the world we live

The world I live in is not always 109% balanced in every situation. Back in grade school the majority of my teacher were women. Sexism?! Currently at work the vast majority of my coworkers are male. Sexism?! Even though the women are in positions of power? My immediate family is three males to one female. Should my brother have been a girl? While the worldwide balance may approach something like a 50/50 split each individual case rarely meets such a strict quota.

I guess my question is this-- if the Speaker was female, and 2 out of 3 Vanguards were female, and maybe one other vendor, how would you feel about it? Would you feel things were worse, somehow?

Nope. I wouldn't bat an eye at it. Because, again I place the treatment and portrayal of women above requiring writers meet a 50/50 split that is not always present in real life (for unavoidable, nonsexist reasons.)

Why isn't the question-- why are 2/3 of them male? Why is that the default?

The default should be to look at the treatment of men and women first and consider variations from the ideal 50/50 quota a long distant second.

The world you live in is more than half female. So, yes, I'd say diverging from that is something you'd expect to have a reason for doing. Even if you were just writing a biography, you'd expect the cast of characters to resemble the real world. If it didn't, with respect to gender, I guess I'd wonder-- what is it about the world you inhabit that makes the males interesting and important, and the females less so-- and does that say something about the world you live in, or something about you?

This may not be an answer that you want to hear, but even though women are half the population, they are responsible for far fewer of the events, inventions, and creations that move civilization. I am not saying they don't participate, but pivotal wars, scientific discoveries, influential works of art, etc, are more often than not brought about by men. Women do this too, but in demonstrably fewer numbers. The reason why is complicated.

Seeing as how stories are generally about interesting things, it stands to reason that you are more likely to pick a story about a man. It says something about the world we live in.

My point is that when such imbalances are obvious even within a work that is nowhere near as overtly sexist as the worst of them, things can (and should) be much, much better than they are.

The key is not to have 'balance' within individual games, but to have balance across all games as an aggregate. Not all stories benefit from adding in characters of another sex or gender. The last thing you want to do is to throw in a woman just because. In a way that is worse. It all depends on the story you are telling. We don't benefit from counting women; we benefit from having more stories told with a female perspective to begin with. The fact that you can choose the sex of your guardian, the main character, already says that the sex of the characters in the game universe means nothing. But look at Life is Strange. Change any of the major players, and you have a very different game.

I suppose I've been kidding myself all this time that because Bungie's games were nowhere near as bad in this respect as the worst examples in the field, or even of the average mainstream game, that Bungie fans were as well. This thread seems to demonstrate otherwise, unfortunately.

Ouch. Whats been said here by those disagreeing with you means people like me are as bad as the worst examples in the field? Really?!

Quirel, I now even more whole heartedly agree with you opening statement in our chat last night. :)

I suppose I've been kidding myself all this time that because Bungie's games were nowhere near as bad in this respect as the worst examples in the field, or even of the average mainstream game, that Bungie fans were as well. This thread seems to demonstrate otherwise, unfortunately.

I disagree with your stance in this thread (I'm pretty much on the same page as Raga, actually), but this statement is over the top. The thread, as a whole (I'm not counting the trollish nature of the opening post), is a pretty reasonable discussion by people who are thinking about the issue at hand and not, for the most part, insulting one another. You take issue with one of the only examples of a personal attack (a relatively mild one, at that), and your response is that we've demonstrated that Bungie fans are as bad as the worst examples in the field?

You're better than that, Narc.

I suppose I've been kidding myself all this time that because Bungie's games were nowhere near as bad in this respect as the worst examples in the field, or even of the average mainstream game, that Bungie fans were as well. This thread seems to demonstrate otherwise, unfortunately.

Claude said it much better than I'm about to, but this really bothers me. The implication that I'm a sexist is pretty fucking insulting actually, and it's not something to be thrown around lightly.

Let's break this down for a second, just as an overall summation of this thread.

Bungie is sexist because not enough Raid/Strike bosses are female. But Eris is potentially going to turn bad, and that's also a no-no and sexist. How's that add up?

Bungie is sexist because there aren't enough important female characters. I would argue that statement is totally wrong. The three most important characters in Destiny are the Exo Stranger, Queen Mara Sov, and Eris. The Stranger alerts us to the threat of the Vex, arguably the main driving force of vanilla Destiny's narrative. Mara Sov helps us with that threat by helping us find the Black Garden. Eris alerts us and helps us defeat both Crota and Oryx. You could argue that someone like Zavala or the Speaker is more important by his position at the Tower, but neither of those characters drive the narrative forward at all, so that's not really a point that can stand as far as I'm concerned.

The only really important male character so far, narratively, is Cayde. Seems like Bungie has a pretty good handle on the situation, but maybe I'm missing something.

I guess if you break it down to counting them like cattle, yeah, women are underrepresented in Destiny. But's that pretty much the only way you can reach that conclusion.

Seriously? Your response to "Bungie isn't perfect" is "go make your own game"?

Of course not. My reaction to "Bungie should have more female characters to fill out a quota" is an invitation to step down from your soapbox and be the change you want to see.

A character's gender matters. If I write a story where the main character is female, it's because that gender fit that character. Could be a lot of reasons for it. But if their gender doesn't matter, it's because they aren't that important to begin with, and I have better things to do than make sure that every category on the diversity checklist is crossed out. Perhaps the writers of Destiny feel likewise.

Sheesh, man, leave yourself somewhere else to go to. What if I had actually criticized them? How hurt would you feel then?

Depends on what you're criticizing them for. There's a lot of stuff Bungie has done in the past few years that merit scrutiny. Not revamping their story to include a 50/50 gender divide ain't one of them.

I suppose I've been kidding myself all this time that because Bungie's games were nowhere near as bad in this respect as the worst examples in the field, or even of the average mainstream game, that Bungie fans were as well. This thread seems to demonstrate otherwise, unfortunately.

Oh, come on now, you're better than that.

That wasn't at issue. I talked about how many characters there are, how they are portrayed and utilized within the game, and supported the OP's general position that there is an imbalance in Destiny's game world. That it exists is not a matter of opinion-- it is there.

Yes, if we're talking about a purely demographic breakdown of the characters in Destiny, there is a disparity between male and female characters. Nobody is denying that the disparity exists. We are disputing that the disparity is inherently sexist or needs to be corrected.

And because we disagree, we are automatically as bad as the little shits who scream at women in multiplayer and send death threats? You have lost all sense of proportion.

Good question.

A New Monarchy fire team that visited the Lighthouse did in fact experience odd effects. Maybe our Light protects us somewhat?

That can't be it, because I've fought in places the light can't touch, like the Vault of Glass or the numerous 'darkness zones'.

Hopefully this will be explored further and I think it will be as the effects of Vex exposure seem to be very closely related to Maya Sundersh's and the Future War Cult's odd Golden Age machines.

Maybe our guardian is somehow 'special'. Ever wonder why the computer thinks we are Dr. Shim?

Or maybe it's a plot hole.