1 hour ago, LAwLz said:
It feels out of place and forced, and I think most people feel that way.
The thing is, a lot of people such as myself - a battlefield fan - didn't care and it didn't felt out of place and forced. Why is that?
The discussion is in WHY does it feel out of place and forced for some people?
I explained it in my post and I'm gonna develop it explicitly again because there are various psychological phenomenons at work here and I could cite some for you:
1. Status Quo bias: people prefer when things remain the same. In BF5's case, they obviously changed something
2. Norms & Values: The discomfort of transgressed norms, not only that, but the expression of it. In fact, a during a very recent study of the university of ULB (I assisted to the lecture last month) the discrimination of LGBT people at work: in short, there was a theory that could be inducted with the data gathered: People that transgress the norm are not discriminated because they transgressed it, but because they show that they transgressed.
For instance, you get records of such conversations: "I hate muslim/gay people!" -"Well, I'm actually muslim/gay" -"Oh, you're okay because we don't notice it"
In case of BF5, they flagantry transgressed the norm of by presenting a woman as the new face of the game
3. The cognitive dissonance: which is the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes: It's an extremely strong psychological state in which people won't accept their own incoherence (it's actually part of a defense mechanism to preserve self-integrity and thereby mental sanity), that's why even the most developed arguments won't even work.
No one wants to be sexist because it's socially undesirable. I believe many of the people complaining about the woman in the game also believe in equality between genders and women's rights. I believe they do not mean to be demeaning to women in any way. BUT the incoherence I exposed in the sole argument brought by those people which complains about historical inaccuracy (...):
1. Battlefield never pretended (in any game) to be historically accurate
2. There are many other bigger inaccuracies that didn't bother people that much
(...) shows that, the outrage may actually be (intended or not) sexism deflected (by the cognitive dissonance) behind the curtain of "historical accuracy". Because they ofcourse don't mean to be sexist, but they need to find a thing ("historical inaccuracy) to blame their discomfort on.
I'm sure there are many other phenomenons such as the lack of the ability of decentring which means being able to step outside of one's own truisms, cognitive scheme and preconceived, culturally anchored thoughts and ideas.
All in all, the status quo bias, norm&values, the cognitive dissonance are the main psychological phenomenons (I could observe in the people commenting against of the implementation of women in the game) that could explain their discomfort and the reason why they oppose this change.
This is my last comment for this thread.