Female video game character shows off her butt

>female video game character shows off her butt
>everyone is mad
>meanwhile IRL every woman shows off her ass anyway

So why is it a problem? Seriously? Can't have tracer have her butt to the camera, can't have R. Mika spank herself. What other examples are there?

Attached: tracer_ots.0.jpg (800x800, 65.83K)

It's all a cycle, eventually it will be lewd again for women to show their ankles

A video game woman cannot consent to being ogled or objectified
A real life woman chooses to flaunt it and that's her choice
At least I think that's what's going on here, someone correct me if I'm off on this one.

>>female video game character shows off her butt
>>ugly women and simps wish to get laid by being good bois to feminists, get mad
>>meanwhile IRL every woman with a good looking body shows off her ass anyway

Women don't like competition or getting called out. This is both.

only ugly people get mad at shit like this

fictional women are not conscious because they don't exist, that's like saying fucking your pillow is rape because it can't consent.

Dakimakuras have rights!

Yes, they don't have consciousness, but aren't they implied to be thinking, breathing, sentient beings?
What I mean is, maybe they're arguing some kind of transference, that is, the women in these games seem to enjoy sexualizing themselves, so men will assume real life women are doing the same thing and it's ok to treat them as sexual objects first and people second.
I'm just speculating, but that was always the impression I got.

This whole nontroversy was never even about sexualisation, man. It wasn't brought up once. They never said anything about the other characters.

They are not to be implied to be thinking outside the fiction they exist within, because they are not people, they don't exist, they are pixels and polygons.
>so men will assume
That's like saying people will think killing has no consequences because you can get away with it in GTA.
Lefties are mentally ill, it's not a rational, objective discussion, they're purely emotion driven, if something rubs them the wrong way it must be because it should be illegal.

Flaunt it if you got it ladies. Wear the tightest fucking yoga pants you got and walk around so I can see that ass jiggle.

Attached: DC609D06-900F-44AA-AA06-A2DA13B52FCE.jpg (4032x3024, 1.21M)

>Lefties are mentally ill, it's not a rational, objective discussion, they're purely emotion driven
This is projection. You're driven entirely by muh dick and you lack the higher brain functions necessary for empathy.

>this is projection
>projects
sorry for taking you seriously.

Kek, btfo

BASED

Of course you think I'm projecting because you're projecting onto me
>no u is BTFO
Standards have really dropped around here. But I guess it doesn't matter what someone says when you're a partisan hack as long as it's something you agree with.

>You're driven entirely by muh dick

Men are driven interely by the dick.
They cannot control themselves.
It's a trigger, cannot. control. themselves.

Their purpose is to coom.

I'm mad because Tracer has fucking negative ass.

>endless advertisement

Attached: 1646947907510.jpg (1000x1000, 121.46K)

>Men are driven interely by the dick.
>They cannot control themselves.
Yes we can, you mindless beast.

I didn't actually project onto you. You were speaking under the pretext of "assuming that's what *they* meant" and got assblasted when I called them out, meaning you're either a twitter tourist or yet another purist larper baiting for yous.
Again, I'm sorry for taking you seriously, no more (You)s from me.

>falling for fabricated controversy

Again, Blizzard did it on purpose to push the game. It did the same with the whole "GUISE DON'T MAKE PORN OF OUR CHARACTERS OR WE WILL BE VERY ANGRY ABOUT IT, MMM KAY?? *wink* *wink* :))))"
If you think companies aren't able or willing to create fake controversy to push a game, you're an idiot.
Paramount did the same with the first Sonic movie.

I hope it will always be ok when Japan does it.

nigga take your meds

i think you need professional help

because women devs and land whales on twitter don't like any form of beauty. If tracer was 300lbs they'd cheer for lewd poses

here, fuck that other retard.
I'm really just trying to play devil's advocate because you sure as hell won't see any diehard leftists posting in this thread, or on most parts of Any Forums in general.
But you have a point, there's a complete double standard when it comes to women being allowed to wear what they want but not allowing the media portrayal of women to actually reflect this.
I think it comes down to a sense of sexual empowerment, or the idea that women should be able to pick and choose who is allowed to sexualize them. In the context of video games, female characters lack that empowerment when it's male developers creating them for male gamers (and yes they're not real, but art is always a reflection of reality and putting sexy women in a game DOES function as a social statement)

Oh yeah? Then how come when you see a hot female the first thing your brain tells you to, is breed?

Did you just wake up today with nothing to get mad about so you decided to dredge up some stupid horseshit from 6 years ago so you could have an excuse to be in a bad mood?

There was a rainbow Mika thread that got deleted so I had to make a thread to talk about it. Dumb dumb

>DOES function as a social statement
what the fuck am I reading

women feel threatened by pixels and polygons cause they take attention away from them

Attached: 1648406581661.jpg (700x1303, 457.65K)

The point is they don’t want undesirable men to enjoy the female form. They become physically ill at the thought of some ugly weirdo enjoying sexuality even if its because of a 3D rendered cartoon woman. If gamers were universally Chads, women wouldn’t care about ass and tits in vidya because Chads deserve sexual pleasure and chuds deserve only humiliation and death.

based and blackpilled

Well, it's just nature's way of reaping the undesirables from the genepool.

At this point their disgust is simply a genetic evolutionary response.

>You were speaking under the pretext of "assuming that's what *they* meant" and got assblasted when I called them out, meaning you're either a twitter tourist or yet another purist larper baiting for yous.
I'm not invested enough in this argument to untangle this mess of a sentence and ascertain the nature of your delusions.