Before we begin, I should clarify that the Mass Effect series is a beautifully crafted, excellent series of games. Nothing I say here is designed to be a blanket decree that the series is evil, immoral or sexist. This is merely my take on some aspects of the series, and what that might communicate to certain players. The series explores many complex themes in an intelligent and meaningful way; the fact that Mass Effect can be seriously subjected to this level of analysis is in itself an achievement (though thankfully we're seeing this more often in gaming).
Now that’s over, let’s begin, shall we?
The Asari as “the feminine”
Of course, the most glaring depiction of femininity in Mass Effect is in the Asari. These design choices of the Asari positions the player to think of them as an “all-female” race, as opposed to a species for which sex and gender don’t exist. This in turn invites the player to think of the Asari as a representation of human women.
Most often, the Asari are described as mono-gendered. As far as I’m aware, the closest earth analogue for Asari reproduction is autogamy, which would require the Asari to be described as a hermaphroditic species. That the Asari are described as mono-gendered instead of mono-sexed already implies an intrinsic link between sex and gender, reinforcing gender roles.
Despite claims that concepts of “male” and “female” don’t exist in their society, the Asari are clearly constructed as a feminine species. They are all voiced by female actors, and excepting those wearing armour, dress in typically feminine clothing. They are broken into three life stages, “Maiden,” “Matron,” and “Matriarch,” all of which are inarguably feminine terms. Although they’re some kind of crustacean or encephalopod, they appear as human women from the neck down. This is reinforced in the gameplay mechanics of ME1; Asari are the only non-humans that can equip human armour. This is reinforced even in codex entries, which refer to the Asari as an “all-female” race.
The Asari basically function as one giant expression of “the feminine.” Though this is used to promote positive messages about the capacity and value of women, there are many instances in which the series reinforces gender roles.
Asari and age
Asari live for about a thousand years, and don’t seem to display any signs of age. Though it is true that most non-human NPCs lack obvious signifiers of age other than voice, the Asari are the only race specifically described as “ageless” in-universe. Matriarchs, the oldest of the Asari, are considered the wisest and most capable political leaders in the galaxy. However, their age comes with no physical cost; the respect of players doesn’t have to overcome the visible signs of age. Much like major female figures in the real world, we demand that they be physically attractive as well as merely capable.
If anything, the sex appeal seems to increase with character importance. Matriarch Benezia, born sometime around the 12th century, looks like a 32 year old dominatrix, and has a cup size that almost seems preternatural. Samara, also over 900 years old, is probably the most detailed Asari model in the series. Despite being a celibate warrior-monk (describing herself as a “knight-errant”), Samara still wears sexually appealing clothing that seems to sacrifice protective elements, especially when compared to the armour of Shepard, Garrus or Grunt.
Though it might be strong to say these design choices reinforce the notion, they do nothing to separate a woman’s value from her physical appearance.
Asari and sexual freedom
Asari celebrate a kind of “free love,” in which fleeting or short-term relationships are considered no less valid than long-term ones. Culturally, they consider “joining” (the Asari equivalent of sex) to be a positive and enriching thing, regardless of their partner’s species or gender. Taken on its own, this is a promotion of female sexuality, and an endorsement of female sexual liberation. However, there are a number of contradictions to this message in the series as well.
Asari enter the Matriarch stage earlier if that “join rarely.” This, in a small way, reinforces the idea that women who have frequent sex are reckless and immature, and are less dignified and wise. Despite the assurances of sexual freedom in Asari culture, Asari biology contradicts the harmlessness of sexual liberation.
Samara and Morinth as celibacy vs. sexual liberation
The Asari give us the characters of Samara and Morinth. Morinth is what the Asari call an Ardat-Yakshi, basically an Asari version of a vampire. The link to real-world vampire stories is clear from her actions and abilities, but the most explicit clue is the name of the ship that carries her from Illium: the Demeter.
The relationship between vampires and sex is nearly inextricable, and generally a vampire’s sexuality is among their more dangerous attributes. This is true of Morinth, who literally kills people by joining with them. Morinth never repents for the murders she commits, insisting that her satisfaction is worth more than the lives she took. In this way, she can be considered as a representation of the destructiveness of sexuality.
Samara states that all three of her children are Ardat-Yakshi, and thus makes it clear that their condition is caused by some genetic atypicality of Samara. Upon discovery of the Ardat-Yakshi condition of Samara’s children, they are forced to choose a life of celibacy and exile, or be executed. The severity of the treatment of Ardat-Yakshi is ameliorated in the codex of Mass Effect 3, stating that roughly 1% of Asari reside on “the AY spectrum,” and that very few of them have a condition severe enough to warrant exile. This does much to reduce the brutality of the Asari response to Ardat-Yakshi, but the fact remains that many sufferers are imprisoned in a religious institution to suppress their dangerous sexuality.
Samara and Morinth are posed as polar opposites. This is reinforced by the fact they have an almost identical appearance, and the the mirrored nature of their eventual duel. The dichotomy of celibate justice and sexual destruction is at the core of their comparison. As with many vampire stories, the underlying message is one of the dangers of unchecked sexuality. Siding with Morinth over Samara is a renegade option, mechanically reinforcing the evil of choosing sexuality over celibacy.
Benezia and Aethyta as feminine vs. masculine
Another Matriarch we meet in the series is Matriarch Aethyta, who acts as the antithesis to Benezia. She’s gruff and graceless. She swears, she’s violent and direct. Aethyta is clearly a comical character. It can be argued that the humour arises from her being unlike a Matriarch, but I believe it is because she is unlike an Asari in general. In either case, she is a joke because she lacks the traits most valuable to her feminine race: grace, beauty, and manners. Seeing such masculine qualities on a member of such a feminine species is cause for laughter. That Aethyta deviating from gender norms is treated as comedy reinforces the validity of gender roles in society.
The Benezia/Aethyta comparison also holds a subtle criticism of femininity itself. Benezia is known as an almost quintessential Matriarch, possessing all the femininity required of the positions, while Aethyta is far more masculine. That the two were in a long-term relationship (about a century) invites the player to compare them to one another.
Aethyta is distinctly more relatable to the player than Benezia. Firstly, Aethyta has a far greater level of characterisation. In addition, one of recurring themes of Mass Effect is the necessity of militarisation. Regardless of the player’s paragon/renegade choices, political figures routinely dismiss Shepard’s calls for military aid, with invariably disastrous results. Like Shepard, Aethyta supports militarisation, while Benezia opposes it. That Aethyta is an alternate name for Athena, the Greek goddess of wisdom and just warfare, further pushes the validity of her position in comparison to Benezia’s.
Benezia also becomes indoctrinated by Sovereign, appearing as an enemy in ME1. This positions the player to dislike her. In addition, the player may feel she is weak and malleable, as she fell to indoctrination that Shepard resists effortlessly multiple times.
Not only does this reinforce gender stereotypes (masculine directness & warfare, feminine guile & gullibility), it positions the player to side with Aethyta, causing them to favour masculinity when compared to femininity. In addition, Aethyta’s views caused her political career to end, painting the Asari and their feminine politics as weak, misguided, and blind. Aethyta and Liara even discuss the uselessness of the Asari in the Reaper War, endorsing Aethyta’s position in comparison to those of other Asari.
While endorsing a feminine gender role for women may be bad, it is important to remember that individual traits that are traditionally considered as feminine (empathy, nurture, pacifism, etc) are not inherently bad in themselves. By portraying femininity as inferior to masculinity in this way, Mass Effect implies a similar ordering of the traits associated with each.
Ronald Taylor as a representation of patriarchy
Perhaps the most overt examination of sexism and patriarchy in the series is Ronald Taylor.
When the player discovers him, he has been living as the ruler of his crew after enforcing a state of barbarism. He and the other officers had taken advantage of the crew’s neural decay, exploiting the women as sexual slaves. Eventually, Ronald killed all the officers and keeping the women for himself.
Upon discovery, Ronald attempts to explain his actions. He talks about the need to assert dominance, claiming that subjugating the women was a necessary evil to impose some semblance of order over the now animalistic crew of the MSV Hugo Gernsback. It is highly likely this is a lie to try and justify Ronald’s actions. The delivery of these lines, however, seem to be among Ronald’s most honest. They seem filled with a remorse or guilt that other lines do not. Even when Ronald is talking about his abandonment of Jacob, he seems cold and dismissive in comparison.
Regardless of why the subjugation started, the real insight of this section is that the subjugation continued. Despite the fact that it was no longer “necessary,” and that Ronald had the ability leave the planet, he chose to remain. The society Ronald has constructed, one of male-dominance and female servitude, has become the status-quo, and he perpetuates it not because he believes it good, useful or right, but because he is comfortable. Those who benefit from the exploitation of others are not usually motivated to change the system that grants these benefits. The message seems to be that once it is established, patriarchy will self-perpetuate.
The men who eventually fight Ronald, the hunters, don’t do so out of concern for the injustice of the system, but because Ronald exiles them. Only at this point are the men motivated to fight, after remaining complicit for almost 10 years.
We do know that some of the other officers were opposed to Ronald’s decisions. The first we hear of is the ship’s medical officer, and it is implied that she was the first person Ronald decided to execute. That it is a woman who objects to Ronalds’s actions shows again this “us and them” mentality; we hear of no specific male officer who opposes the exploitation of the women until the beacon is repaired. Though there may have been some male officers that objected, we can’t know their gender for certain, and it appears that they only challenged Ronald when he suggested they remain on Aeia. Once again, people are only motivated to challenge the system once they are personally threatened or harmed.
This message of the stubborn persistence of the status quo is reinforced by the length of time Ronald is Aeia before discovery. If the writers had decided Ronald had been on the planet for two years, or even just a few months, the impact of Ronald’s actions wouldn’t have been all that different to the player. The fact that they chose a decade highlights the longevity of corrupt or unjust systems of control, and the insidious manner in which they maintain.
Worth mentioning is that the player has no ability to condone Ronald’s actions. The choices Shepard can make are sending him to face trial, or executing him by proxy. Unlike other significant judgements of morality Shepard can make throughout the series, Ronald Taylor is locked as an immoral character. Even at the most surface-level examination, this section decries the exploitation of women, and sexual violence against them.
Miranda Lawson and the objectification of women
Miranda serves as an interesting exploration of the objectification of women. Her father, Henry Lawson (her literal patriarch), had her genetically engineered from his own DNA. Everything about Miranda is constructed to be ideal, including her appearance. Her father intends for her to be the perfect continuation of his dynasty. He views her as an object; a tool with which he can further himself. Later, the Illusive Man recruits her, viewing her in a similar way. From birth, Miranda’s worth was determined by her relationship with a man.
Miranda is constructed exclusively from her father’s genetic code. The intricacies of how this is implemented are never revealed, but it is made clear that she has no mother (or at least no specific mother). It seems that Henry Lawson deliberately chose for his child to be female.
There are a number of reasons he might do this, all of which pertain to his relationship with women and how he views them. It could be that, consciously or otherwise, he thinks of women more as property. It could be that he feels they are less independent, and easier to control. It could be that he, as a man in a patriarchal society, feels that men are “plain” women are more “exceptional.”
There could also be practical reasons, such as the lower incidence of many genetic disorders and syndromes in women, or merely that Henry’s X chromosome provided more useful genetic material. I find this unlikely, however. Again, I’m no biologist, but I imagine the level of genetic technology required to craft a person as specific as Miranda would make sex a fairly trivial choice.
Regardless of why it exists, the difference in sex between Miranda and her parent position the player to consider the relationship with this difference in mind.
In an early conversation with Miranda, some egregious framing choices are made with the camera. We are presented with lingering shots of Miranda’s body. Many people criticise these camera choices as unjustifiably sexualising, but I believe differently. The shots occur during a conversation in which Miranda is discussing her genetic construction. She mentions all of the benefits she is imbued with, which include her physical appearance. She describes herself like and object, and the objectifying shots reinforce this. They encourage the player to see her through the eyes of her father and the Illusive Man, as an object or tool.
Over a number of conversations with Miranda, it becomes clear that even she views herself as an object. Though she loathes her father for his specific mistreatment of her, she has internalised his assessment of her worth. This communicates that women can’t simply ignore or dismiss objectification, and that their objectification from others informs their understanding of themselves.
In order to complete Miranda’s story arc, the player has to improve Miranda’s self-worth by affirming her individuality. It is worth noting that whether Shepard is female or male, or whether a paragon or renegade approach is taken, this is still the end result. Viewing Miranda as a person, and affirming her value as an individual, is what brings her story closure.
Final thoughts
The Mass Effect series explores many themes; sex and gender make up only a small part. The intent of the writers seems to be a positive portrayal of women, and many of the explicit messages of the series do portray women in a positive light. Most female characters are well rounded, especially those in the main cast. Unfortunately, though, there are many negative tropes and stereotypes the series falls into, and there are many choices that seem to inadvertently support gender roles.
No comments:
Post a Comment