It strikes me as not a little weird that the word for a hot, sexy member of either sex is the same as a word for a very, very small child.

Like, "Why, hello there, infant." dogwhistle

Similarly to when people call their significant others "baby".

Wait til you find out people like to spank and be spanked in the bedroom. It’s basically Jeff Epstein’s island.

That's because they call you "Daddy" in the bedroom.

There's actually sort of a real reason for this. In the traditional monogamous or even polygamous relationship throughout human history it's usually the Male taking care of the female. Women when seeking a relationship are sort of searching for a caretaker that has sort of father like qualities of having enough resources to take care of them, taking a dominant role... etc.

The relationship most similar to it is father and daughter I can sort of see why the linguistics have sort of merged.

Obviously, in the last century, things have changed and the etiquette of relationship dynamics need to be spoken of in a way that's more egalitarian.

But you can't completely deny millions of years of human anthropological behavior. If men usually played more dominant/caretaker roles in relationships in the majority of civilizations, then along that timescale certain behaviors become a bit ingrained biologically through natural selection. It's not surprising to see these attributes creep into language.

Poppycock. until recently, in agricultural societies, families (usually men) were choosing families to cement relationships with by trading children. what the woman (and frequently the men) wanted was mostly irrelevant. see https://scholars-stage.org/against-human-sexual-selection/

If "daddy" is a thing, it's because of frequent age differences, since pregnancy is extremely hard on your body (fatality rates as high as being a soldier in a warzone until the advent of modern medicine).

Are you also offended by the fact that "history" has "his" in it?

No? Why would I be?

I don't think so. The language used in 2023 may be different, but the intent is the same: "Give them nudity, give them sex, give them violence. This is what will make us money".

As the GP said, at least they were honest with their intent. They knew their audience and set out to target them. But there are far more people playing games nowadays, so you'd likely not set out to make a big game by zero-ing in on that specific audience.

This language is unconventional for business even in the 90s. Additionally men wouldn't talk this way in front of women in Any time.

The difference now is it's less culturally excepted to talk like this even in casual situations even when just among men.

Plenty women objectify men by wealth and status and they refer to men this way even publicly. The cultural change is mostly one sided, skewed more towards not offending women.

For example, referring to men as Hunks or Chads is just no offensive at all.

This shows an inherent lack of understanding. Some men, starved of affection, feel nice when treated similarwly to women. I'd they have their ass grabbed, or they get car called, of whatever - it feels like a nice confidence boost.

However, it entirely overlooks the fact that for many women, this behavior is non-stop, and comes with the very important difference that men are inherently much stronger than women, which means that they constantly feel a lot more threatened and unsafe than men do in the same situations.