The evolution of women in Magic
General forum
Posted on Sept. 3, 2014, 3:41 p.m. by ChiefBell
Magic's grown up. It really has.
Recently there's been a massive shift in attitudes towards women in this game that ranges from subtle artistic changes to overt rule changes. By focusing more on this massive section of the community Wiazrds are making a concerted effort to attract more players, be inclusive, and help females to feel as welcomed as males. Not only is this a smart business move on their part but it's also good for the players too.
The track record for CCGs and other sci-fi / fantasy games is pretty poor in terms of sexism. Artistic style and use of the female form is often hyper-sexualised or addresses negative characteristics, rather than those that are neutral or positive. The card Earthbind is an early example of this. There's absolutely no reason for a nude female to be portrayed here. It doesn't add anything to the flavour - it's just a clear case of objectification and the fulfillment of underlying domination fantasies. It's obviously drawn by males, for males. In order to have some indication of how this game is geared towards a male audience look at the card Elvish Ranger which can be found here: Link. Click on the picture of the flag (by 'All Sets') to compare both pictures from the set 'Alliances'. Look at how the male is drawn as compared to the female.
Fast forward to the Innistrad block and we're given Triumph of Ferocity . Again, this is a card that displays overt domination of a female, but in this case by a male protagonist. The placement of the thighs and positioning of the bodies is also highly questionable - and made for fairly uncomfortable viewing for certain females.
Finally the card Liliana of the Veil and the way Liliana is written is a classic example whereby we are vilifying a character partly based on their body and the way in which they choose to use it. This is about demonising a character for nothing more than being independent, sexual, and liberated. Using your body as an asset is a completely value neutral action and shouldn't be used as flavour for a black card, or a white card - or for any other indication of morality. It just exists as a concept, neither god nor bad. To show the double standards that exist here Garruk's use of his body for strength is glorified and portrayed positively. Liliana's use of her body for sexuality is looked down upon.
The problem with these tropes (words, phrases, and images used for artistic effect) is that they cause two negative consequences. The first is that it propagates male-centric themes, views, and opinions. Obviously if you're surrounded by these kinds of messages all the time then they're taken in and become acceptable. Effectively, if you spend a long time gawking at women in their underwear because of how they look in card form then a certain amount of that starts to rub off on the individual in the real world. It doesn't occur overtly or in an obvious way but it does happen subtly. The second reason is that this attitude becomes a barrier to entry for women. People don't feel welcomed by a game or series that actively trivialises those that are similar to them. Why would women want to play a game that portrays them as objects? That questions their agency? That doesn't cater for them at all.
So how has this changed?
Firstly, the current director of organized play is a woman and Wizards has clamped down on the kind of unwelcoming behaviour that has typically plagued the game. With females taking higher roles within the company the attitudes towards them has changed. Recently, wizards banned a player for life after he threatened to rape a female employee (Link). Many games organisers and companies simply shrug their shoulders and say that there are no rules about conduct outside of the game. Wizards on the other hand has been unafraid to tackle the problem head on with this clarification: "Disrespectful, harassing or bullying behavior, whether onsite or online, is not welcome at Magic events and violates Magic tournament floor rules". This can only be a good thing after all. If we can make women feel more comfortable in the game then they're more likely to want to play the game - and that can only be a good thing.
Secondly the artistic portrayal and placement of women in the game has changed dramatically. In the new set 'Khans of Tarkir', 3 of the 5 leaders of the clans are women. Giving them a more prominent role in the game world. The art has improved too. This picture of Anafenza, one of the clan leaders, (here) shows her as a strong powerful woman that avoids many of the issues we previously saw. There's no massively exaggerated bust area, she's not standing in a sexually suggestive way, she's not secondary to a man in the scene. She's a badass riding a chariot pulled by ibexes. Wizards have made a conscious decision to put female characters into positions where males would normally be seen. Not because they want something 'sexy', something 'caring' or any other adjective that's typically identified with women - but just because they can. This is a concerted effort to put women on par with men in an overt and highly calculated way by drawing and presenting them differently.
Lastly is the thematic shift. Abzan is a clan about family and duty (more information can be found in this article here) led by Anafenza, the female seen in the picture above. Usually designers would focus on tropes including maternity, child-rearing, nurturing and protecting the clan, given the theme of 'family'. This would have been the sexist route, because it would have reduced her to old, tired cliches of women and their place being on the sidelines. Instead they come out with this quote from her: "We do not pile the skulls of our enemies, nor make them into ornaments. We grind them into dust. We leave nothing for their families to weep over, nothing for their descendants to honor". Anafenza leads her to clan to victory from the front line. This is refreshing because typically women can be portrayed as support characters, not those that lead from the front. However, here we see wizards thrusting these characters into the traditional warrior, general, and leader role. By reversing the roles (giving females the roles typically filled by men) Wizards is combating inequality and bringing a refreshing new outlook to the game.
Overall Wizards has changed the way women are drawn, how visible they are within the game, how they are presented thematically, and how female players are supported by judges and rules. This should bring more players into the game, and diversify the player-base, leading to a better environment for all.
Well done Wizards.
VampireArmy says... #3
As an egalitarian i like that they are being inclusive and whatnot. Just please never let it go overboard. By such i mean i hope that there won't be a nit pick for sexism where there isn't any.
September 3, 2014 3:55 p.m.
omnipotato says... #4
Totally agree that it helps player demographics, but I don't think it's a big deal morally to overtly sexualize both males and females. Women just make a bigger deal about it (e.g. Barbie vs He-Man).
September 3, 2014 3:57 p.m.
Cookie for you, ChiefBell. I'm rather new to the game and had figured that Wizards had always been rather progressive, due to female characters being significant characters for most of the storyline; Serra, Elspeth, Liliana, Teysa, Kiora, the list goes on. Your evidence, of course, makes me even more appreciative of where we are now and where we can go. Thanks for the post!
September 3, 2014 3:59 p.m.
InfiniteParadoX says... #6
Huh. I think that, while some of this is true, and i am glad about the changes, the huge kerfuffle over female sexism is really not meant for tapped out, as many people have many different opinions. personally, I agree with omnipotato.
September 3, 2014 4:03 p.m.
VampireArmy says... #7
Something to consider : Triumph of Ferocity is as much abouit "male domination" as Triumph of Cruelty is about "Female domination"....i mean cmon....thats what I mean about nitpicking and why I despise feminism.
September 3, 2014 4:04 p.m.
Triumph of cruelty doesn't feature the women in an overtly sexualised position over the man...... totally different art.
September 3, 2014 4:06 p.m.
VampireArmy says... #9
you're right, it shows a man being dragged to a hoard of hungry zombies about to be devoured (by which she uses her magic to do btw) she outsmarts him. thus perpetrating women smarter than men does it not?
September 3, 2014 4:08 p.m.
It's about the themes within magic. We have virtually no examples of women out smarting men. We many examples of men out smarting women. One card does not reverse the last 10+ years. You can't say 'yeh but look at this one card!' Because it's not representative.
September 3, 2014 4:16 p.m.
VampireArmy says... #12
How about in lore, liliana has literally outsmarted Jace (the motherfucking mind sculpter might I add?) in order to gain information by manipulating him?
This is one counter example. I can pull up so many more if you'd like.
September 3, 2014 4:19 p.m.
So by egalitarian what you actually meant 'I stick my fingers in my ears and use false equivalencies as evidence that everything is ok'.
I'm on my phone so I cba to read through now but I've gone through enough of this tripe to know all the sources are full of inaccuracies. I've been dealing with this for a very very long time.
September 3, 2014 4:19 p.m.
Well, it's just more natural for men to fight, than it is for women. It's more natural for men to go to war than it is for women. Men just are stronger. It has been like that since the humans where born.... Actually I think it's a little weird, that the clan leaders are women....
But I don't care about sexism. I just want to play Magic! :D
September 3, 2014 4:19 p.m.
VampireArmy says... #15
By Egalitarian I mean I do not focus on one gender when looking at equity (equality is not obtainable in my eyes) I see inequity as a CLASS issue. not gender. Also, please don't tell me i'm plugging my ears then follow up by telling me my sources are inaccurate without even seeing them. That's highly arrogant of you.
September 3, 2014 4:22 p.m.
omnipotato says... #16
MtG players are the biggest male chauvinists on earth (except maybe the frequenters of 4chan) so I can't see this discussion going the way that ChiefBell wants.
September 3, 2014 4:24 p.m.
There's intersectionality. Class issues, race issues, gender issues. It all comes together into one melting pot. As there are class issues so too are there gender ones. To say that the gender issues are not a case of inequality is.... weird.
September 3, 2014 4:26 p.m.
VampireArmy says... #18
In some areas they are. I said I don't focus on one gender over the other as Feminism attempts to do vehemently. Protesting Male issue conferences, "Teach men not to rape", and things like that. They set the bar at Female = always victim, Male = always aggressor which is heavily incorrect.
September 3, 2014 4:28 p.m.
omnipotato says... #19
NorthernRaven, when you create your own universe you make the rules. If they want women to be as physically capable as men in the MtG universe, WotC can do so. And if doing that helps with their sales with the female population, I say go for it.
September 3, 2014 4:30 p.m.
lemmingllama says... #20
There are many examples of females being strong, mature individuals without sexualized art as well. Look at all of Benalia and specifically the art of Benalish Hero . It is true that there have been some areas that aren't exactly perfect, but these are small cases in comparison to the entirety of Magic.
Either way, I am pleased that women are deciding to give Magic a try. I just see it as having more players and more people brewing new decks.
September 3, 2014 4:32 p.m.
VampireArmy - one of the problems is that if you have one group of people whos oppressed more than another group of people you have to focus on their issues in a bigger way than the un-oppressed group's. So for example if you want to make lower earners have as many rights as higher earners you have to analyse the ways in which the higher earners systematically oppose the lower earners. It's the same principle with gender gaps. You have to say things like 'we should teach males not to rape' rather than 'we should teach females to avoid rape' in the same way that we'd do things with income inequality or race. We don't say to coloured people things like - ah you should have just avoided all of our racist doctrine. We say things like - we need to directly target that doctrine that's causing the inequality. Maybe that makes things a bit clearer?
Also I read a few of those sources one the facebook page - not all but quite a few aren't actually from research papers or studies, thay're just newspaper articles.
September 3, 2014 4:41 p.m.
A. ChiefBell nailed it.
B. Lewis' Law I think is beginning to apply here already. That's kinda disappointing.
September 3, 2014 4:43 p.m.
VampireArmy - also a lot of those sources if you bother to read them say 'there is a gender problem, it's just not as big as it might be'. Key being that it's still actually there.
September 3, 2014 4:44 p.m.
VampireArmy: It (the patriarchy) is kind of an apparent thing. Men have it better in almost every frickin' way in the Western world. Like, yes, there are problems that they exclusively have, but there are dozens more for women. Men in higher positions than women is kind of the definition of "patriarchy" ("father rule").
Also, why the actual f**k do "Anti-feminists" and "anti-feminism" exist? Like, what's so unappealing about women wanting actual equality?
September 3, 2014 4:50 p.m.
slovakattack says... #26
Maybe you guys would be interested in my perspective, considering that it's, well, fresher than most of yours, as I've only been seriously playing for about 6-7 months. I've personally been a big fan with how Wizards has portrayed women in their cards, some of my favorites being ones like Knight Exemplar . (I'd say Elspeth, but that's a tad too mainstream :P)
I like that Wizards is committed to showing women in powerful roles, but isn't afraid to print cards like Liliana of the Veil . (Yes, women can be sexy without being sexist or a caricature! Crazy, but true!)
One of the issues I tend to have with games that try to include female empowerment is that they tend to look at things like female sexualization as 'taboo', irrespective of how it's presented/the context it's presented in. I appreciate that Wizards seems to know how to get the best of both worlds, currently.
Heck, I haven't seen a card yet that's really made me roll my eyes (a few ancient cards aside, but I'm not counting those, as the Wizards of today is quite different than the infant company that started this TCG.) The closest that a card has come to making me snort with derision is Hero of Bladehold , but if you take a look at the backround in the promo version... well, it's equal, at least :P
September 3, 2014 4:53 p.m.
VampireArmy says... #27
Well that page is run by a woman in the US and a Woman in the austrailia (ithink..either that or the UK she hasnt posted in a while)....also a huge uprising of women have invaded from all countries including third world countries to stand against feminism...sooo....yep...
September 3, 2014 4:54 p.m.
Viral_Assassin says... #28
Really great article and read. I want to comment more but with the lack of skills required to make what I comment come across as legitimate conversation over it sounding awful. Let me further state that I in no way am I trying to defend the artists or anyone/thing in the examples, merely just point of view and how things are different in the eyes of others.
In the example of Triumph of Ferocity the image in conjunction to the card it self makes me feel like they are saying that the male is more strong then the female. At the same time it's completely in character of those characters in the image (with in the time they were in that plane). Garruk is the all powerful bad ass that he leads on to be. He is just tank. Regardless of how Liliana of the Veil was drawn/painted or what ever it is the use, she probably would do what ever it take to accomplish what ever it is she needed to do even if that means showing some skin. I'm not saying it's right, or that it's wrong just I think some cards are capturing the essence of what that card is or capturing the character with in it. The positioning of Garruk is in my eyes perfect with what the card it self does. Strength, Pride and Ferocity. He was able to best his enemy, female or not. The fact that it depicted him besting/dominating a female form is rather up for debate. Could of been anything else but they chose Liliana because of how much story the two have together through out the years of magic.
Some of the older cards were very random when it came to images on the card and what the card actually does which your example was good. I don't understand why it was illustrated the way it was and agree that it's very off putting.
Tl:Dr Perception is a big key here.
September 3, 2014 4:58 p.m.
I'm with VampireArmy here. Women who call themselves feminists usually aren't satisfied until they have the situation totally reversed to the point that they have the power.
If it was really just about being equal, they wouldn't be placing women in the leadership roles just because they are women. Femenism is not about fairness, it's about revenge against big mean men.
September 3, 2014 4:58 p.m.
VampireArmy - There are problems with that statement in that patriarchy is so ingrained into society that even women can believe that it's not a real issue - and therefore the fact that the page is admin'ed or supported by women doesn't really prove much.
Anyway, It's late in the UK so I do need to sleep. I'm not going to blow you off and be an arrogant prick, I will read those articles and highlight why they're problematic but I don't have time right now, ok? If you want to message me on my profile we can perhaps discuss this somewhere that isn't here because that's not really the point of this thread.
September 3, 2014 5 p.m.
VampireArmy: Didn't exactly answer my question. Why are people being actively against feminism if the point of feminism was and is bringing women up to an equal standing with men? Like, what's the problem with that? As much as there is a vocal minority of women who profess to be feminist and also want to, like, forcibly neuter men, that's a vocal minority, and should probably be considered the "voice" of feminism as much as the Westboro Baptist Church should be considered the voice of Baptist Christians (which is to say, not at all).
September 3, 2014 5:02 p.m.
VampireArmy says... #32
@ ChiefBell I'll let it rest for now. I get too emotional about this too easily. Rest good friend.
September 3, 2014 5:02 p.m.
Enjoyable read, different perspectives in the open is important.
September 3, 2014 5:03 p.m.
I think maybe we should steer this away from whether feminism and patriarchy are necessary concepts and more towards how we feel magic has shifted its attitude towards women. Lets go easy on politics and talk more about actual cards and examples.
September 3, 2014 5:04 p.m.
VampireArmy says... #35
erabel honestly I'd have to say that question is best answered by the women of these pages themselves as I don't speak for them. If you wish to, i'd simply ask them if i were you. The admin of that Page , Jessica is a very educated woman who has no qualms debating anything that is asked to be debated. currently I'm a bit too worked up about this and I would like to wait until I see what Bell has on the subject after a period of time. I'm sure he'll post on my wall and i'd be happy to further this discussion at that point man. I just need to breathe.
September 3, 2014 5:06 p.m.
Viral_Assassin says... #36
K34 the idea of feminism is for equality. It's that usually most (not all) forms of it that are viewed, is from the mouths of people who "support" the idea but actually do not understand that it's about EQUALITY and usually turns into Man Hate.
September 3, 2014 5:12 p.m.
Liliana of the Dark Realms offended me and I'm not even a girl.
September 3, 2014 5:22 p.m.
pookypuppy6 says... #38
Just wanted to expand on women in Magic to show Khans wasn't a one-set trick; Theros block was also quite a good setting for women. The main protagonist of the set was Elspeth, Sun's Champion and little of her role or her actions and story are motivated by her gender. Plus, we had a lot of female warriors, including the Setessan Battle Priest , and for a set with a lot of nymphs I wouldn't say any of them are sexualized to the extent of quite a few of the things you might see in Innistrad like Deadly Allure or Crossway Vampire . Women wearing leaves have come a long way towards something as unremarkable as Oakheart Dryads . And about bloody time too.
September 3, 2014 5:25 p.m.
LittleBlueHero says... #39
Marchesa, the Black Rose and the entire culture of Setessan's in the theros block (women are the warriors) would tend to agree that MTG is heading in the right direction.
There still aren't a lot of cards where women are overtly "dominating" a man. However, I don't feel there are a lot of cards where men are "dominating" women either.
Most of the time we see someone in peril it is at the hands of Beasts and Demons and the like... in which case there is a whole lot of both sexes represented.
I agree that women are often oversexualized in fantasy media, but I can also admit I like to see cards representing a beautiful lady using her sexuality to her advantage Gwendlyn Di Corci . But its a double edged sword because if you were to depict a man using his sexiness to outsmart a woman all hell would break loose.
September 3, 2014 5:38 p.m.
pookypuppy6 says... #40
Sexuality in games could work as long as it has purpose, whether male or female. Again, Crossway Vampire represents a card where the art expresses sexuality for no evident reason (in this art, the unusually prominent chest).This is where sexuality serves no purpose on a card that has nothing really to do with sexuality.
On othe other han, Gwendlyn Di Corci or Liliana Vess herself are perhaps sexualized in art is used to portray a character, perhaps as those who revel in sexuality, feel comfortable with it or use it as a tool or weapon. Not encouraging by any means as it begs the question as to why male characters don't have characters portrayed this way, but at least it's not meaningless with with something like Crossway Vampire or the "first-glance-and-you-miss-it" boob-window in Blustersquall .
September 3, 2014 5:47 p.m.
MTG's been around for a long while. Regardless, they've always been pretty good about this sort of crap. I really don't see a problem. If you're wasting time nitpicking the portrayal of women in MTG, I think you may want to look elsewhere. Other companies in the gaming and entertainment industry are much worse off when it comes to depictions of females.
And if you really want to get into this topic, men are also portrayed in highly masculine ways. They're often fucking ripped, appear with scant clothing, and are often given attractive features. Two-way street...
September 3, 2014 6:06 p.m.
Rasta_Viking29 says... #42
Basically we all have to have the same opinion nowadays. People's personal morals should be adhered to universally because they are more enlightened then you are. Baaahh baaahh
September 3, 2014 6:18 p.m.
Wow, that female Elvish Ranger art just looks ridiculous. I mean, as a bisexual woman I enjoy a bit of artistic eye candy here and there but I admit you can't just staple cleavage to every female depiction even if there were an equal amount of shirtless men (shirtless Sorin or Sarkhan anyone? No? Just me? Okay then).
This issue is too complicated for me to really take a real stance on-- everyone is different. What some women might find as demeaning might be a sexual fantasy for others. I'd feel kind of cool wearing Liliana's outfit and someone else might find it entirely humiliating. Then there are probably guys who lust over certain characters or card art but there are also guys who couldn't bother to care how much boob (or man chest) is in their art. But I feel its absolutely rare in the medium of fantasy fiction for male consumers to feel put off and uncomfortable with the sexuality depicted in the art styles unless they're gynephobic or they found something where a good portion of men are wearing metal g-strings to battle, so I agree that it fosters a sense of inequality in which it feels like the male audience is being catered to at the expense of the female audience.
In the end, do I enjoy sexy art on occasion? Sure. Do I need it on my magic cards? Not really, that's what real sexual art mediums are for. Magic is a game, not a porn gallery, and I feel like we can all live with that.
September 3, 2014 6:59 p.m.
MountainMan817 says... #44
I really dont want to get to deep into this, but, i dont think there is a real "issue" with the art of newer cards, as they represent a concrete story we are all familiar with.
Liliana of the Veil is a under the curse of The Chain Veil from Shandalar and she attempts to curse Garruk Wildspeaker ... Triumph of Ferocity is the depiction of that! Lili being a foul temptress and Garruk standing over her evil as a strong just force...
September 3, 2014 7:18 p.m.
MountainMan817 says... #45
Its not a sexualization of a women in magic but of a destruction of evil in the world...
September 3, 2014 7:20 p.m.
asasinater13 says... #46
I think Triumph of Ferocity specifically isn't horrible in "man dominating woman" but more how the woman is portrayed while being dominated. it was to show a spot in the story where the greatest hunter is about to beat on a sorceress. guy being stronger than the girl there is pretty acceptable, but the way it's slightly sexualized isn't good.
in Liliana of the Veil I have mixed feelings, I mean liliana the character has slept with jace to get information from him, but then we have a problem that we only have women as characters who have done this, and that doesn't mean we need to depict that on the arts. I agree that it's a problem but definitely see wizards going in the correct direction
September 3, 2014 7:27 p.m.
GoldGhost012 says... #47
I'll probably have something else to say, but for now I'll settle for this.
Yes, Liliana Vess used Jace to further her goals (though it eventually didn't work out), but contrary to popular belief, she did feel something for him. She considered just staying with him, but was too afraid of her personal demons.
September 3, 2014 8:06 p.m.
MindAblaze says... #48
I have so many things to say on this I don't know where to start.
First off...men are sexualized in Magic too. Example : Rakish Heir ? (why does he need to be half nude to eat, no shirt no shoes no service) Obviously not as often as women, and that's the social issue which can't be ignored, which is ChiefBells point. Its a fair point and I think equality is being worked towards slowly. We have a lot of old thinking left in the world.
Second point; I refuse to believe Triumph of Ferocity is sexual. The angry, ferocious hunter seeks revenge on another being who cursed him. If you were holding somebody to a big rock ready to smash them, there aren't many other ways you could pose for a picture without being right on top of them. That wouldn't make for very interesting art, and we'd be blowing our rape whistles much more loudly then.
This leads into the next point. Liliana is a character that embodies blacks values. Power at any cost. She's sold her soul for youth, used her body to manipulate Jace at Bolas' whim, and has no concern for the well being of others, angels, demons and planeswalkers alike. The fact they chose a female to depict this character is a bit suspect, but a male would be less believable I think. Liliana Vess is a lot less sexualized than Steve Argyle's Liliana of the Veil , but she's much more power hungry and willing to exploit her...assets at that point. I'm not condoning it by any means, but from a character building perspective she's a very archetypal black character. She's a villain, and it's her power hungry, success at all costs attitude that is villainous more than her t&a.
Imagine a world where the rapist was the most successful at distributing their gene pool. That person is pure motive and intent, and can be a sleaze bag villain. Is that an interesting character? Does it sell magic cards. It's a very black character for sure, but it doesn't work. It is the same though.
Think back to high school. The "number" is multiplied for women and divided for men because of a double standard of acceptability and expectation. It's more acceptable for me to get 6 kitties than you to get six snakes, so for Liliana to use her charm to get her way seems wrong.
I may have gone a bit tangential, but I think embodying a colors values is the point of the characters. Whether its Elspeth, Garruk, or Liliana, these characters are what they're intended to be...and if we see something else maybe we need to question ourselves.
September 3, 2014 8:23 p.m.
VampireArmy says... #49
I just needed to interject that using any vampire card for sexuality is a bit useless. Vampires are highly sexual creatures by lore. There are examples accross the board of male and female over specialization. Onto garruk. He's not exactly a prime cannidate for male empowerment.due to the fact that he's not even all that cognitive. He's a 7 foot tall beast who can hardly use language let alone care for anything to do with a society. This is the problem i see. Women, anatomically have smaller frames and lower muscle mass. The average female does not best The average male in hand to hand combat. How do.they compensate? Cunning. Females are faster in body and wit than the average male. Why do women wear skimpy armor? Yes partly for eye candy but also realize the more armor, the more weight, the slower you move. Wome need to be faster. It makes sense to wear something that allows maximum agility
September 3, 2014 9:42 p.m.
VampireArmy says... #50
Also mtg had a very different target audience then than they do now...if this game were intended strictly for teenage.gamer girls, we'd see a lot less skimpy.girls and a lot more joe 8 pack
ChiefBell says... #2
Maybe Femme_Fatale might be interested in this.
September 3, 2014 3:48 p.m.