Discussing Gender... Again

I spoke earlier about a number of troublesome comments Bonnie Nardi makes in her book My Life as a Night Elf Priest: An Anthropological Account of World of Warcraft regarding gender. At that point I hadn’t read much of the book (only a few chapters) so I was making assumptions about Nardi’s notions about gender; however, she spends a significant time discussing gender in her section “Cultural Logics of World of Warcraft.” While much of what she says is refreshing (considering the way some of her comments came across in earlier sections) some of it, to me, still problematic (and I plan to ask her these things during our discussion tonight).

Nardi spends a significant amount of time discussing the kinds of language males used in this virtual world. She explains: “The social space was maintained as one in which males set the rhetorical tone. Sexualized, homophobic language was normalized in text and voice chat (although stopping short of what would probably take place in a men’s locker room)” (153). She argues that this kind of language occurs because the virtual environment created in World of Warcraft is that of a “boy’s tree house.” She points out that though men appeared dominant because of this language the tree house “allowed females more latitude in speech and action than everyday life typically does—latitude they often leveraged and enjoyed” (153). I don’t feel that Nardi fully explains this concept—how exactly are females given more latitude in speech and action and how are they not allowed this in real life?

Speaking in terms of this kind of language, I will focus briefly on a quote from later chapters. In her “Coda” she discusses gambling in Crete and cockfighting in Bali and writes that “according to Malaby and Geertz, the displays of masculinity entangled in these activities drew on deep anxieties, and the need to constantly reassert masculine identity verged on a kind of social obligation” (199). Nardi seems to gloss over this point, moving directly into the fact that gambling and cockfighting can also lead to pleasure because of the pure “fun” of the game. I think, however, that she should have taken a closer look at what Malaby and Geertz had to say for a number of reasons.

Nardi discusses the fact that men who play World of Warcraft female characters typically let others know. She mentions several times that World of Warcraft doesn’t have a lot of players that gender-bend. I question this on a number of levels. First, she notes that she wasn’t particularly interested in certain guilds that cater to gay people and other minorities. In her discussion of masculine language, she discusses the frequent homophobic slurs used during play. It seems to me that gender-bending is deeply discouraged in these types of guilds and therefore she didn’t really get the full sense of the amount of gender-bending that occurs in the game. Furthermore, when discussing men that play female characters (and are “out” as men) Nardi focuses on the fact that the men play the character because they want to look a nice female ass. At first, Nardi questions the reality of this and asks one of her students if she should believe players when they tell her this is why they play female characters. Her student said yes, believe them. I wonder, though, if her student wasn’t merely attempting to reassert his own masculinity. I feel that the men in the game that claim they play just to look at females backsides are actually just attempting to reassert their masculinity, which Nardi’s book seems to prove is an important part of gameplay. Though it’s not within the scope of Nardi’s book, I feel that it would be important to look at the ways in which social construction of masculine identity plays into the ways in which these men answer such questions.

Besides the fact that Nardi seems to ignore the social construction of gender, another problem I had with her discussion of the topic was her use of the words “feminism” and “feminist” in this chapter. In one area of the book (though I can’t seem to locate it now) she mentions that even though the game has flowers and pretty colors, it’s not just a “feminist” game. I find this strange and I’m not sure Nardi has completely taken into account what feminism is. Feminism isn’t about making sure the game is pretty for girls but still has guns for boys. Feminism is about realizing that females can like pretty things as well as guns, or they can like bleak, black and grey things, or whatever. And males can like all these things too.

The one positive aspect that arises from Nardi’s discussion of gender is that she acknowledges that much more needs to be done to fully understand the gender dynamics that occur in-game.

Questions for the Class and for Nardi:

1.    1.  In her discussion of the boy’s tree house, Nardi points out that females are welcome despite the fact that it’s more of a place for boys. How does the fact that the female bodies are hypersexualized in games, even in World of Warcraft make this possible?

2.    2.  If players had the ability to change their characters appearance even more (i.e. body size, height, etc.) would this effect game play and the dynamics of the game?

3.   3.   Nardi mentions that she’s not primarily focused on some groups such as gay guilds, etc. She also talks about how there is little gender-bending in WoW. Is it possible that, because of the hostile environment, during her study she didn’t find gender-benders because of the environment? If she’d studied gay groups, for example, would she have found more gender-bending? If gender-bending actually does occur in-game (and Nardi just missed it) how would this change the study of gender within the game?