Controversial Tropes vs. Women in Video Games Series Comes to an End

[TheMysteriousGX]

She's an opportunist is an opinion that offends you to the core?

Sorry thread: my angry comment was in response to a post that either no longer exists, or I quoted the wrong person. I was reacting to someone who said something along the lines of "I hate casual geeks and I want my hobby back as a boys only club".

I'm fine with Anita's series. I just fucked up with my forum-use ability.

Yeah, got the wrong guy, but that's okay.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Galbrush paradox

Galbrush fallacy, more like. It falls apart as soon as you glance at a game with more than one female character, and a lot of them with only a single female character.

The Tomb Raider reboot game was criticized heavily for having a sequence where the female player character almost got raped. I cannot recall a single instance of anyone ever complaining that a adult man was subjected to sexual violence in a video game - at least not in recent times.

Cool. I mean, I can't recall a single instance of an adult male being subjected to sexual violence in a video game at all, which might have something to do with it.

And while not a game, then another example of the galbrush paradox was from the Avengers 2 movie. Joss Weadon was basically hounded off twitter by angry feminists, who were pissed that he had made their favorite female hero show weakness and hurt in the movie. https://www.digitaltrends.com/social-media/joss-whedon-driven-off-twitter/

See, I'll take Joss's word over why he left Twitter over some angry nerd's, thanks.

I cannot think of a single game outside of horror games that show female player characters really getting hurt - not just "minus 35 HP" hurt, but legit abused and damaged. Compare this to how common it is in games for male player characters to get captured, tortured a bit, then have to escape and fight his way to freedom?

I'm sure there are more examples than just the Tomb Raider game - but for the love of it, then I cannot think of any. Even the recent Horizon Zero Dawn never really featured the main character getting hurt that badly - it was usually other people getting killed and her having to run off and avenge them.

FemShep in Mass Effect comes to mind, but part of the problem with this argument is the lack of female protagonists for this to potentially happen to. I mean, how often outside of horror games does this happen to male characters anyway?

 

[webkilla]

snip

snip

Moral arbitrer? And what happened when she saw a game commiting a fault?

then she moaned and bitched about it in her videos. You can also see in the FemFreq twitter that she has repeatedly complained about people liking video games that she does not approve of - because, you know, not sharing her tastes and opinions makes you a bad person

that's sort of the definition of moral arbiter

Moaning, bitching and complaining. How does that force change?

If you will recall, she appeared before a UN women's council back in 2015. There she said, that being told that you are wrong is a form of online harasment and that the UN should clamp down on stuff like that.

I know it wasn't the full on UN council she was presenting to - but still, reaching that level of political influence, that's dangerous. I mean, gamers constantly bemoan that damn near every legislated who ever tries to censor or legislate on video games doesn't seem to know jack shit about what they're talking about - now imagine if a woman like Sarkeesian in and says hi to a politician like that? Who are they going to believe?

Everything she has is just feels over reals - but she sells like reals, and to normies who do not game it can easily look legit enough that they'll buy it whole hog.

 

[webkilla]

There are two entries on TvTropes on the 'double standard: female on male' rape and 'Double standard: male on male' rape - about how such things are allowed to happen in popular media, without any kind of real drama or outrage. Both entries have sections on examples of these tropes in video games:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DoubleStandardRapeFemaleOnMale
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DoubleStandardRapeMaleOnMale

metal gear solid 3, Sims 2 and 3 for example. In Fallout 3 you can even help a woman drug-rape a man, earn good karma for it! Because doing it the other way around is bad, but when its a woman doing a man its good. Video game logic.

Or the bit from GTA:SA where the crazy woman ties up and rapes the main character.

And that lovely bit of DLC to Outlast with the lunatic who cuts off dudes dicks and then 'impregnates' them - I can guarantee you: if that game had a lunatic dude who mutilated women's genitals and then raped them, then there would be no end of the outrage, but that's a moot point because then the game would get an X-rating instead of an R rating, and that would never get sold, so it will never get made.


As for Joss Wedon's 'word' - right, because he is an avowed feminist and would totally admit the truth on that, right? His PR manager would never let him say that directly.
http://io9.gizmodo.com/black-widow-this-is-why-we-can-t-have-nice-things-1702333037


And finally, with men getting hurt: I posted a list of examples earlier in another post, but there's that lovely torture sequence in GTA:5. In fact, torture scenes in video games are a great example of how men and women get treated differently in video games.

5 seconds on google: I found this video with the "top 15 most violent torture scenes in video games"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B2GZAp75QfQ - you might not want to watch this at work... or near children

Only two of these entries involve women - and in both of those cases you never see any blood, you only really hear them scream, while with the rest of them, where its men being tormented.... hooo boy, hope you haven't eaten before seeing those, for most of them anyway. Hell, one has a dude getting gutted, and one has robot-worms bursting from his face as he dies screaming.

Point is: game companies aren't stupid. They know that they can get away with brutalizing men - but if they do anything to a woman, they get another Tomb Raider shitstorm with Sarkeesian and her ilk complaining that the game is either promoting violence against women, or reinforcing negative stereotypes about women always being the victim. They know they cannot treat men and women equally, unless they go totally PG and don't have any violence at all.

 

[CaitSeith]

snip

snip

Moral arbitrer? And what happened when she saw a game commiting a fault?

then she moaned and bitched about it in her videos. You can also see in the FemFreq twitter that she has repeatedly complained about people liking video games that she does not approve of - because, you know, not sharing her tastes and opinions makes you a bad person

that's sort of the definition of moral arbiter

Moaning, bitching and complaining. How does that force change?

If you will recall, she appeared before a UN women's council back in 2015. There she said, that being told that you are wrong is a form of online harasment and that the UN should clamp down on stuff like that.

I know it wasn't the full on UN council she was presenting to - but still, reaching that level of political influence, that's dangerous. I mean, gamers constantly bemoan that damn near every legislated who ever tries to censor or legislate on video games doesn't seem to know jack shit about what they're talking about - now imagine if a woman like Sarkeesian in and says hi to a politician like that? Who are they going to believe?

Everything she has is just feels over reals - but she sells like reals, and to normies who do not game it can easily look legit enough that they'll buy it whole hog.

And what did the UN do afterwards?

 

[Jamcie Kerbizz]

Finally. Now the non supporters can finally shut up about the damn woman being the greatest con artist and scammer of the 21st century.

Never seen so much outrage and hair trigger reactions to the most bland potatoes YouTube feminist in my entire internet life.

She's as much of a 'feminist' as she is a 'gamer'.

Anyway, scam wasn't targeted at gamers and gaming in the first place. Gamers were pretty much live bait she used. Gaming community acted the way she needed (predicted), when she took a huge dump on it. She expected insecure reaction from community of constantly berated and falsly accused geeks and got it. All that was needed was the right angle to draw a division line and she picked sex/gender - yet another cliche thing geeks are insecure about. F#&*ing sad thing is it worked.

Her goal (as every con-artist's ever) was money. Not making few people upset (that would be just trolling).
That translates to people, that would take defending her out of proportion, NOT ones that would take attacking her out of proportion (thou both were needed). In short, she saw potential in making money out of petty, social media fueled tribalism and she brilliantly played this out.
She got her 'small fry' campaign funded - sure, meaningless but hey money is money.
People can scoff at that all day long but she also carved out a sizable chunk out of large social movement and made their interests spin around her. That's no small feat. Especially if you consider that this hardly could have been planned in the first place. Anita played the cards whe was given and adapted ceasing a lot more both money but also influence which can be cashed in.
Only marketing dept. of huge corporations are able to plan and spin campaigns on planted social media outrage and actually milk money out of that. Something Anita did on her own. How is it not worth recognition (mind you, not admiration)?

She is now well set on just taking a fee for 'telling her story' to followers,
maybe accepting some donations playing the victim card. Most importantly, she isn't in position where she's 'done' (ie. lost credibility with movement she hijacked and mass media).

Are games and players really hurt by that? No.
It's unnerving to be crapped on like that with false accusations. It's annoying to watch distorted problems of actual problems game industry and gaming media have (shallow characters, re-usable tropes/scenarios, constant copying of 'that game that hauled so much money', cronyism and nepotism among creators and supposed critics etc.) but that is it. Gamers as community had already retarded image in mass media, that didn't get any worse (mass murderous, virgin, obese, jobless cretins are now also white, male misogynists. Oh noes!).

Is feminism hurt by her? Nope.
Vocal, social media driven part of it got pretty much hijacked by a con artist. That's it. No real harm done.
It wasn't credible to begin with.

TLDR;
Anita is 'a great' con artists. How many of them started with few hundred bucks and crowdfunded 'project' and ended up having UN as their platform? I honestly do recognise that, as an achievement, few people are capable of. Unless you can name few matching that?

 

[Jamcie Kerbizz]

snip

snip

Moral arbitrer? And what happened when she saw a game commiting a fault?

then she moaned and bitched about it in her videos. You can also see in the FemFreq twitter that she has repeatedly complained about people liking video games that she does not approve of - because, you know, not sharing her tastes and opinions makes you a bad person

that's sort of the definition of moral arbiter

Moaning, bitching and complaining. How does that force change?

If you will recall, she appeared before a UN women's council back in 2015. There she said, that being told that you are wrong is a form of online harasment and that the UN should clamp down on stuff like that.

I know it wasn't the full on UN council she was presenting to - but still, reaching that level of political influence, that's dangerous. I mean, gamers constantly bemoan that damn near every legislated who ever tries to censor or legislate on video games doesn't seem to know jack shit about what they're talking about - now imagine if a woman like Sarkeesian in and says hi to a politician like that? Who are they going to believe?

Everything she has is just feels over reals - but she sells like reals, and to normies who do not game it can easily look legit enough that they'll buy it whole hog.

And what did the UN do afterwards?

What UN always does... fart in chairs, take money and do nothing.

 

[webkilla]

snip

snip

Moral arbitrer? And what happened when she saw a game commiting a fault?

then she moaned and bitched about it in her videos. You can also see in the FemFreq twitter that she has repeatedly complained about people liking video games that she does not approve of - because, you know, not sharing her tastes and opinions makes you a bad person

that's sort of the definition of moral arbiter

Moaning, bitching and complaining. How does that force change?

If you will recall, she appeared before a UN women's council back in 2015. There she said, that being told that you are wrong is a form of online harasment and that the UN should clamp down on stuff like that.

I know it wasn't the full on UN council she was presenting to - but still, reaching that level of political influence, that's dangerous. I mean, gamers constantly bemoan that damn near every legislated who ever tries to censor or legislate on video games doesn't seem to know jack shit about what they're talking about - now imagine if a woman like Sarkeesian in and says hi to a politician like that? Who are they going to believe?

Everything she has is just feels over reals - but she sells like reals, and to normies who do not game it can easily look legit enough that they'll buy it whole hog.

And what did the UN do afterwards?

They didn't get time to do anything:

All the people who had found her presentation to the UN, which had been done along with Zoe Quinn (the woman who basically got Gamergate started), rather distasteful descended upon the report they had officially been there to present

It was a report to the UN on cyberviolence against women - and I kid you not: it equated online violence and harasment with real life violence... and keep in mind that Sarkeesian herself had extended that to include being told you're wrong.

Trick was that the report had apparently been written by a 13yr old high on crack, weed and ludes - because it was so poorly made, with so incredibly bad sources that once all Sarkeesian's and Quinn's critics had made that fact a very public fact, then the UN retracted the report and pretended that it never happened.

But what the report had urged for, was the UN forcing ISPs to filter internet content big brother style to prevent anyone's fee fee's from getting hurt. It was a call for mass censorship of anything anyone might find offensive, which of course would have required that someone got hired into the UN to advice on what was to be deemed wrong... maybe a position Sarkeesian would have liked?
http://gizmodo.com/how-the-un-screwed-up-its-cyberviolence-report-1735465019

 

[webkilla]

*many snips*

She's as much of a 'feminist' as she is a 'gamer'.

Anyway, scam wasn't targeted at gamers and gaming in the first place. Gamers were pretty much live bait she used. Gaming community acted the way she needed (predicted), when she took a huge dump on it. She expected insecure reaction from community of constantly berated and falsly accused geeks and got it. All that was needed was the right angle to draw a division line and she picked sex/gender - yet another cliche thing geeks are insecure about. F#&*ing sad thing is it worked.

Her goal (as every con-artist's ever) was money. Not making few people upset (that would be just trolling).
That translates to people, that would take defending her out of proportion, NOT ones that would take attacking her out of proportion (thou both were needed). In short, she saw potential in making money out of petty, social media fueled tribalism and she brilliantly played this out.
She got her 'small fry' campaign funded - sure, meaningless but hey money is money.
People can scoff at that all day long but she also carved out a sizable chunk out of large social movement and made their interests spin around her. That's no small feat. Especially if you consider that this hardly could have been planned in the first place. Anita played the cards whe was given and adapted ceasing a lot more both money but also influence which can be cashed in.
Only marketing dept. of huge corporations are able to plan and spin campaigns on planted social media outrage and actually milk money out of that. Something Anita did on her own. How is it not worth recognition (mind you, not admiration)?

She is now well set on just taking a fee for 'telling her story' to followers,
maybe accepting some donations playing the victim card. Most importantly, she isn't in position where she's 'done' (ie. lost credibility with movement she hijacked and mass media).

Are games and players really hurt by that? No.
It's unnerving to be crapped on like that with false accusations. It's annoying to watch distorted problems of actual problems game industry and gaming media have (shallow characters, re-usable tropes/scenarios, constant copying of 'that game that hauled so much money', cronyism and nepotism among creators and supposed critics etc.) but that is it. Gamers as community had already retarded image in mass media, that didn't get any worse (mass murderous, virgin, obese, jobless cretins are now also white, male misogynists. Oh noes!).

Is feminism hurt by her? Nope.
Vocal, social media driven part of it got pretty much hijacked by a con artist. That's it. No real harm done.
It wasn't credible to begin with.

TLDR;
Anita is 'a great' con artists. How many of them started with few hundred bucks and crowdfunded 'project' and ended up having UN as their platform? I honestly do recognise that, as an achievement, few people are capable of. Unless you can name few matching that?

There have been a few games that were made in Japan but didn't get a US/english speaking release, the game companies citing that they didn't want to have to deal with angry backlash due to the game's raunchy content. Read it somewhere on Nichegamer, don't have a link right now.

But ya, I can see why one can come to the conclusion that she would be a con artist who's built up a masterful deception around herself, cashing in on the outrage generated by her bullshit. Or she could be a fanatic SJW feminst.

...that its not possible to tell which should be just a little telling

 

[CaitSeith]

snip

You quoted the wrong guy, dude.

EDIT: I mean, you quoted me as the writer of someone else's post.

 

[CaitSeith]

snip

snip

Moral arbitrer? And what happened when she saw a game commiting a fault?

then she moaned and bitched about it in her videos. You can also see in the FemFreq twitter that she has repeatedly complained about people liking video games that she does not approve of - because, you know, not sharing her tastes and opinions makes you a bad person

that's sort of the definition of moral arbiter

Moaning, bitching and complaining. How does that force change?

If you will recall, she appeared before a UN women's council back in 2015. There she said, that being told that you are wrong is a form of online harasment and that the UN should clamp down on stuff like that.

I know it wasn't the full on UN council she was presenting to - but still, reaching that level of political influence, that's dangerous. I mean, gamers constantly bemoan that damn near every legislated who ever tries to censor or legislate on video games doesn't seem to know jack shit about what they're talking about - now imagine if a woman like Sarkeesian in and says hi to a politician like that? Who are they going to believe?

Everything she has is just feels over reals - but she sells like reals, and to normies who do not game it can easily look legit enough that they'll buy it whole hog.

And what did the UN do afterwards?

They didn't get time to do anything:

All the people who had found her presentation to the UN, which had been done along with Zoe Quinn (the woman who basically got Gamergate started), rather distasteful descended upon the report they had officially been there to present

It was a report to the UN on cyberviolence against women - and I kid you not: it equated online violence and harasment with real life violence... and keep in mind that Sarkeesian herself had extended that to include being told you're wrong.

Trick was that the report had apparently been written by a 13yr old high on crack, weed and ludes - because it was so poorly made, with so incredibly bad sources that once all Sarkeesian's and Quinn's critics had made that fact a very public fact, then the UN retracted the report and pretended that it never happened.

But what the report had urged for, was the UN forcing ISPs to filter internet content big brother style to prevent anyone's fee fee's from getting hurt. It was a call for mass censorship of anything anyone might find offensive, which of course would have required that someone got hired into the UN to advice on what was to be deemed wrong... maybe a position Sarkeesian would have liked?
http://gizmodo.com/how-the-un-screwed-up-its-cyberviolence-report-1735465019

Side note: That gizmodo article is a little outdated. The report is back on the official site.

http://www.unwomen.org/~/media/headquarters/attachments/sections/library/publications/2015/cyber_violence_gender%20report.pdf

And yet, ISPs aren't filtering content.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Side note: That gizmodo article is a little outdated. The report is back on the official site.

http://www.unwomen.org/~/media/headquarters/attachments/sections/library/publications/2015/cyber_violence_gender%20report.pdf

And yet, ISPs aren't filtering content.

Well yeah. It helps that even people like Zoe Quinn were roasting that report for being junk.

 

[CaitSeith]

snip

snip

Moral arbitrer? And what happened when she saw a game commiting a fault?

then she moaned and bitched about it in her videos. You can also see in the FemFreq twitter that she has repeatedly complained about people liking video games that she does not approve of - because, you know, not sharing her tastes and opinions makes you a bad person

that's sort of the definition of moral arbiter

Moaning, bitching and complaining. How does that force change?

If you will recall, she appeared before a UN women's council back in 2015. There she said, that being told that you are wrong is a form of online harasment and that the UN should clamp down on stuff like that.

I know it wasn't the full on UN council she was presenting to - but still, reaching that level of political influence, that's dangerous. I mean, gamers constantly bemoan that damn near every legislated who ever tries to censor or legislate on video games doesn't seem to know jack shit about what they're talking about - now imagine if a woman like Sarkeesian in and says hi to a politician like that? Who are they going to believe?

Everything she has is just feels over reals - but she sells like reals, and to normies who do not game it can easily look legit enough that they'll buy it whole hog.

And what did the UN do afterwards?

They didn't get time to do anything:

All the people who had found her presentation to the UN, which had been done along with Zoe Quinn (the woman who basically got Gamergate started), rather distasteful descended upon the report they had officially been there to present

It was a report to the UN on cyberviolence against women - and I kid you not: it equated online violence and harasment with real life violence... and keep in mind that Sarkeesian herself had extended that to include being told you're wrong.

Trick was that the report had apparently been written by a 13yr old high on crack, weed and ludes - because it was so poorly made, with so incredibly bad sources that once all Sarkeesian's and Quinn's critics had made that fact a very public fact, then the UN retracted the report and pretended that it never happened.

But what the report had urged for, was the UN forcing ISPs to filter internet content big brother style to prevent anyone's fee fee's from getting hurt. It was a call for mass censorship of anything anyone might find offensive, which of course would have required that someone got hired into the UN to advice on what was to be deemed wrong... maybe a position Sarkeesian would have liked?
http://gizmodo.com/how-the-un-screwed-up-its-cyberviolence-report-1735465019

Who exactly wrote the report? (citation needed)

 

[Erttheking]

Snip

You know, you pulled a card that I see over and over again, and it really drives me up the wall. Yes those are real issues, yes those are real problems. And you are doing them a disservice because you're only bringing them up when people are complaining about problems women have to go through. This keeps happening. People only bring up those problems when people are talking about the problems women have to face first. Because they seem to be less interested in talking about those problems and addressing them, being more interested in just making those damn feminists shut up. I'm not saying you're doing that here, just that plenty of people have done it before, and you're kind of going down the same path as them, intentionally or otherwise.

If you honestly care about those problems, I suggest you bring them up outside of a context where the main goal seems to be getting feminists to shut up. I don't barge into conversations about problems men face and scream "but what about the problems that women face?"

Also it's already been pointed out how Joss Whedon himself has contradicted the narrative that you present in that post. And Outlast 2 has a woman being raped. So...yeah.

And yes, game companies are very fucking stupid. How many times have they pulled "PC Gaming is dead." How many times have they decided that survival horror is dead? Every last piece of bullshit Nintendo has pulled with artificial scarcity, keeping the price of the Wii U high, and cutting off the NES classic when demand was still high? Online passes? The uncontroled splurge of barely functional games on Steam? The claims that games with women with main characters won't sell? Something that Horizon Zero Dawn and Neir Automa utterly proves wrong?

Gaming executives are some of the dumbest cunts around.

 

[webkilla]

snip

snip

Moral arbitrer? And what happened when she saw a game commiting a fault?

then she moaned and bitched about it in her videos. You can also see in the FemFreq twitter that she has repeatedly complained about people liking video games that she does not approve of - because, you know, not sharing her tastes and opinions makes you a bad person

that's sort of the definition of moral arbiter

Moaning, bitching and complaining. How does that force change?

If you will recall, she appeared before a UN women's council back in 2015. There she said, that being told that you are wrong is a form of online harasment and that the UN should clamp down on stuff like that.

I know it wasn't the full on UN council she was presenting to - but still, reaching that level of political influence, that's dangerous. I mean, gamers constantly bemoan that damn near every legislated who ever tries to censor or legislate on video games doesn't seem to know jack shit about what they're talking about - now imagine if a woman like Sarkeesian in and says hi to a politician like that? Who are they going to believe?

Everything she has is just feels over reals - but she sells like reals, and to normies who do not game it can easily look legit enough that they'll buy it whole hog.

And what did the UN do afterwards?

They didn't get time to do anything:

All the people who had found her presentation to the UN, which had been done along with Zoe Quinn (the woman who basically got Gamergate started), rather distasteful descended upon the report they had officially been there to present

It was a report to the UN on cyberviolence against women - and I kid you not: it equated online violence and harasment with real life violence... and keep in mind that Sarkeesian herself had extended that to include being told you're wrong.

Trick was that the report had apparently been written by a 13yr old high on crack, weed and ludes - because it was so poorly made, with so incredibly bad sources that once all Sarkeesian's and Quinn's critics had made that fact a very public fact, then the UN retracted the report and pretended that it never happened.

But what the report had urged for, was the UN forcing ISPs to filter internet content big brother style to prevent anyone's fee fee's from getting hurt. It was a call for mass censorship of anything anyone might find offensive, which of course would have required that someone got hired into the UN to advice on what was to be deemed wrong... maybe a position Sarkeesian would have liked?
http://gizmodo.com/how-the-un-screwed-up-its-cyberviolence-report-1735465019

Who exactly wrote the report? (citation needed)

I found a link hosting the original 2015 report: http://www.unesco.org/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CI/CI/images/wsis/GenderReport2015FINAL.pdf

It claims to have been made by the "UN BROADBAND COMMISSION FOR DIGITAL DEVELOPMENT WORKING GROUP ON BROADBAND AND GENDER"

Now, real fun comes when look at the report's sources:

If you CTRL-F for this string: "c:/" you will find that - and I shit you not - one of the sources cited in the report is a file on someone's C-drive.

but beyond that, the report also cited utterly discredited reports that claim that video games turn boys into "killing zombies" - or claims that pokemon is a killing game designed for toddlers beginning at 2 and 3 years old.

Slightly biased sources, right?

It was when that kind of stuff came to like that the original report was pulled and everyone involved basically pretended that it never happened

 

[webkilla]

Snip

You know, you pulled a card that I see over and over again, and it really drives me up the wall. Yes those are real issues, yes those are real problems. And you are doing them a disservice because you're only bringing them up when people are complaining about problems women have to go through. This keeps happening. People only bring up those problems when people are talking about the problems women have to face first. Because they seem to be less interested in talking about those problems and addressing them, being more interested in just making those damn feminists shut up. I'm not saying you're doing that here, just that plenty of people have done it before, and you're kind of going down the same path as them, intentionally or otherwise.

If you honestly care about those problems, I suggest you bring them up outside of a context where the main goal seems to be getting feminists to shut up. I don't barge into conversations about problems men face and scream "but what about the problems that women face?"

Also it's already been pointed out how Joss Whedon himself has contradicted the narrative that you present in that post. And Outlast 2 has a woman being raped. So...yeah.

And yes, game companies are very fucking stupid. How many times have they pulled "PC Gaming is dead." How many times have they decided that survival horror is dead? Every last piece of bullshit Nintendo has pulled with artificial scarcity, keeping the price of the Wii U high, and cutting off the NES classic when demand was still high? Online passes? The uncontroled splurge of barely functional games on Steam? The claims that games with women with main characters won't sell? Something that Horizon Zero Dawn and Neir Automa utterly proves wrong?

Gaming executives are some of the dumbest cunts around.

Ok... how about this:

this 'problem' you mention - specify it. And provide actual evidence that women are being influenced by it.

Secondly: again, the Joss Whedon thing? believe him if you want to, but the fact remains that he wasn't quitting before the rabid feminist shitstorm. This article here questions his decision to leave twitter just the same: https://www.digitaltrends.com/social-media/joss-whedon-driven-off-twitter/

I mean, for years he was tweeting pro-feminist stuff - when finding himself under fire from the people he thought was his fans - do you think he'd denounce them? Of course not, but that doesn't change that didn't leave until they stirred up drama.


Thirdly: Congratulations, you have cited one game where a women got raped. Now I ask, in reference to my original querry: so what? No really.

All I see are people of your opinion, going "this kind of game content offends me"
- show me where these games are hurting women IRL
- show me actual evidence that these games are doing as Sarkeesian says, that is reinforcing negative stereotypes about women
- show me that you're more than just pearl-clutching, and cringing at stuff you don't like

Finally: Game companies have NEVER said that PC gaming is dead. Citation needed? If I recall correctly, a few years ago, there was a bit of online drama when a shitload of gaming media companies, you know, Polygon, Kotaku, those gits, declared that "gamers are dead" - but I would love to see evidence that it was actual game making companies that were shitting on their own costumer base

IIRC the only game company that ever did that, was Tale of Tales, makers of the "cleaning lady game" Sunset - when they were upset that nobody was buying their cleaning lady simulator game, because for some strange reason there wasn't much of a market for that. Of course they also came out denouncing capitalism after that: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CIGrbmGVAAEt2Ve.jpg:large


I will be awaiting your ironclad proof that video games that feature women in victim roles are a detriment to society

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Thirdly: Congratulations, you have cited one game where a women got raped. Now I ask, in reference to my original querry: so what? No really.

So, where's the outrage? Feminists are supposed to be outraged by it. Where's the outrage?

I will be awaiting your ironclad proof that video games that feature women in victim roles are a detriment to society

Well, there's this bit where a YouTube channel pointing out how many games are using tired, sexist cliches incites gamers to so much rage that an announcement that the series is ending has almost as many replies as the entire first page of the news section combined. Something is rotten in the state of gaming.

 

[Erttheking]

Snip

You know what I would love? Like seriously love? If people on this website could reply to what I actually typed for once. How does it affect women in society? I never said it did, so I don't know why you brought it up.

I think I will believe the words that came out of the man's actual mouth, thank you very much. I find it interesting that you imply the man is a liar when his version of events don't line up with your narrative. Also correlation does not equal causation.

See above.

And you cited one game where a man gets raped. Oh wait, I didn't provide a TV Tropes link.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DoubleStandardRapeFemaleOnFemale

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RapeAsBackstory

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ChildByRape

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AttemptedRape

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SerialRapist

There, now we're on the same page. Round 90% of the examples listed in the gaming sections there are about women.

All three of those things? Never claimed any of them. So please. Only respond to points I actually said. I told you, I told you directly to your face, that I do not care about Anita. Seriously, when you reply to me, take a quick review of my post and only reply to points that I actually made.

The gamers are dead articles (which it sounds like you actually didn't read) have nothing to do with this, so stop trying to derail the topic. And my apologizes, I honest to god can't find any direct quotes where a publisher directly said PC gaming is dead. HOWEVER! I do have plenty of evidence that publishers tread PC gaming with outright contempt. Ubisoft heavily comes to mind.


If you don't have time for the video, here are the cliffnotes. Shitty DRM that disconnected people from the servers if there was an internet problem, limited installations for a game that couldn't tell the difference between a new PC and a new graphics card, lots of baseless games about how 90% of PC gamers are pirates, refusing to port games to PC because of said piracy, (Even though these claims of no ports and massive amounts of piracy came after their DRM that supposedly worked) and that's just when the PC ports are just shit and barely working. Also Uplay.

I. Did not. Say. That. It. Did. Seriously man, this post is, at the very least, 50% strawman argument.

 

[webkilla]

Thirdly: Congratulations, you have cited one game where a women got raped. Now I ask, in reference to my original querry: so what? No really.

So, where's the outrage? Feminists are supposed to be outraged by it. Where's the outrage?

I will be awaiting your ironclad proof that video games that feature women in victim roles are a detriment to society

Well, there's this bit where a YouTube channel pointing out how many games are using tired, sexist cliches incites gamers to so much rage that an announcement that the series is ending has almost as many replies as the entire first page of the news section combined. Something is rotten in the state of gaming.

I think you're mistaking 'rage' with 'discussion'

and could it perchance be that some gamers simply do not like to be baselessly accused of being sexist?

Because again - where is the proof that playing these games make you sexist? Sarkeesian doesn't prove anything - she just claims it is so. She doesn't back up her claims that these games somehow reinforce or increase sexist beliefs.

 

[webkilla]

*snips*

Neat

Now tell me exactly what bad DRM practices has to do with sexist double standards video games? My original point was that the gaming companies seemed to know that they couldn't torment women as much as men in games. No really, I want to hear this.

Now, you did give some lovely tvtropes links. So what?

You never answered my questions:

- show me where these games are hurting women IRL
- show me actual evidence that these games are doing as Sarkeesian says, that is reinforcing negative stereotypes about women
- show me that you're more than just pearl-clutching, and cringing at stuff you don't like

Show me some proof that these games are bad for society. Proove Sarkeesian right. Give me the evidence that she never gave to back up her claims.


Because, and this is kinda important: She's the one making claims - she should be the one giving evidence to back up those claims. She is not doing that, and that which can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.