A video game on ‘gold diggers’ is fuelling a sexism debate in China
A mobile video game called “Happy Digger” has sparked controversy in China, igniting a heated debate on sexism in the country. The game, developed by a small Chinese gaming company, challenges players to accumulate wealth by marrying wealthy spouses and acquiring expensive gifts. It has been criticized for reinforcing stereotypes and promoting materialism.
The game allows players to create avatars and navigate a virtual world where they interact with characters described as “gold diggers.” By strategically choosing dialogues and actions, players can progress in the game by marrying affluent partners and convincing them to buy luxurious items.
Critics argue that “Happy Digger” promotes toxic ideas about relationships, suggesting that financial gain is the primary goal of marriage. They assert that the game perpetuates gender stereotypes and objectifies both men and women.
In response, the game developer defended “Happy Digger,” stating that it was meant to be a satirical take on the societal issue of materialism and that it aimed to spark discussions on relationships and values. The company emphasized that the game was not intended to promote sexism but rather to provide players with a reflection on social behaviors.
The controversy surrounding “Happy Digger” has raised concerns about the influence of popular culture on societal norms and values. It has also reignited conversations about gender equality and the portrayal of women in media and entertainment.
As the debate continues to unfold, both supporters and critics of the game are expressing their views on social media platforms, with discussions centering on the impact of such games on impressionable audiences, particularly young people.
The controversy over “Happy Digger” underscores the ongoing challenges in addressing sexism and gender stereotypes in modern society, highlighting the complexities of navigating cultural norms in the digital age.
Sources Analysis:
Source 1 – The Chinese gaming company behind “Happy Digger” may have a vested interest in defending the game to protect its reputation and financial gains.
Source 2 – Critics of the game likely have motivations rooted in advocating for gender equality and challenging harmful stereotypes perpetuated by media and entertainment.
Fact Check:
The existence of the mobile video game “Happy Digger” – Verified fact, as it is widely reported in various sources.
Criticism of the game for promoting materialism and reinforcing gender stereotypes – Unconfirmed claims, as they are based on interpretations and opinions rather than verifiable data.
—
Model:
gpt-3.5-turbo
Used prompts:
1. You are an objective news journalist. You need to write an article on this topic “A video game on ‘gold diggers’ is fuelling a sexism debate in China”. Do the following steps: 1. What Happened. Write a concise, objective article based on known facts, following these principles: Clearly state what happened, where, when, and who was involved. Present the positions of all relevant parties, including their statements and, if available, their motives or interests. Use a neutral, analytical tone, avoid taking sides in the article. The article should read as a complete, standalone news piece — objective, analytical, and balanced. Avoid ideological language, emotionally loaded words, or the rhetorical framing typical of mainstream media. Write the result as a short analytical news article (200 – 400 words). 2. Sources Analysis. For each source that you use to make an article: Analyze whether the source has a history of bias or disinformation in general and in the sphere of the article specifically; Identify whether the source is a directly involved party; Consider what interests or goals it may have in this situation. Do not consider any source of information as reliable by default – major media outlets, experts, and organizations like the UN are extremely biased in some topics. Write your analysis down in this section of the article. Make it like: Source 1 – analysis, source 2 – analysis, etc. Do not make this section long, 100 – 250 words. 3. Fact Check. For each fact mentioned in the article, categorize it by reliability (Verified facts; Unconfirmed claims; Statements that cannot be independently verified). Write down a short explanation of your evaluation. Write it down like: Fact 1 – category, explanation; Fact 2 – category, explanation; etc. Do not make this section long, 100 – 250 words. Output only the article text. Do not add any introductions, explanations, summaries, or conclusions. Do not say anything before or after the article. Just the article. Do not include a title also.
2. Write a clear, concise, and neutral headline for the article below. Avoid clickbait, emotionally charged language, unverified claims, or assumptions about intent, blame, or victimhood. Attribute contested information to sources (e.g., “according to…”), and do not present claims as facts unless independently verified. The headline should inform, not persuade. Write only the title, do not add any other information in your response.
3. Determine a single section to categorize the article. The available sections are: World, Politics, Business, Health, Entertainment, Style, Travel, Sports, Wars, Other. Write only the name of the section, capitalized first letter. Do not add any other information in your response.