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

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Oct 5, 2011
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
webkilla said:
Well you asked how people in the gaming industry shit on their consumers. I provided answers.

You are not even paying attention to what I am saying. Didn't I say very early on that I don't care about Anita? She is not the only one capable of making claims about sexism in gaming. The right does not begin and end with her. I was making my own claims. Respond to MY claims. You are talking to ME!
 

webkilla

New member
Feb 2, 2011
594
0
0
erttheking said:
webkilla said:
Well you asked how people in the gaming industry shit on their consumers. I provided answers.

You are not even paying attention to what I am saying. Didn't I say very early on that I don't care about Anita? She is not the only one capable of making claims about sexism in gaming. The right does not begin and end with her. I was making my own claims. Respond to MY claims. You are talking to ME!
No I didn't - and you complain that I misconstrue what you say?

And fair enough. You've previously expressed that you feel that video games where female characters are displayed are somehow bad - where is your proof that these games are bad, and I would also like it if you would quantify how they are bad - and of course prove that too.

Come on, get to it - you can't just keep dancing around this forever. At some point you'll have to admit that you either have evidence to back up your claims, or you don't
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,300
6,798
118
Country
United States
webkilla said:
and could it perchance be that some gamers simply do not like to be baselessly accused of being sexist?
I've been part of this "discussion" since 2012. I wouldn't call it baseless.
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.
Well, first you're going to have to find a bit where Sarkeesian says, out right and in context, "playing these games makes you sexist", then you're going to have to disprove the notion that media can reinforce, increase, or otherwise alter a person's belief system.

Because media can, will, and does alter people's beliefs and attitudes constantly. Games, through their interactivity, are in fact very, very good at it. And this goes both ways, before you try to claim I think video games are bad or anything. Game's and other media's ability to influence and inspire people to do great and good things is fantastic. I'd hate to live in a world where influential and moving pieces of art were unable to stir a person's emotions and attitudes towards things. Be downright dull, that.
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Oct 5, 2011
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
webkilla said:
erttheking said:
webkilla said:
Well you asked how people in the gaming industry shit on their consumers. I provided answers.

You are not even paying attention to what I am saying. Didn't I say very early on that I don't care about Anita? She is not the only one capable of making claims about sexism in gaming. The right does not begin and end with her. I was making my own claims. Respond to MY claims. You are talking to ME!
No I didn't - and you complain that I misconstrue what you say?

And fair enough. You've previously expressed that you feel that video games where female characters are displayed are somehow bad - where is your proof that these games are bad, and I would also like it if you would quantify how they are bad - and of course prove that too.

Come on, get to it - you can't just keep dancing around this forever. At some point you'll have to admit that you either have evidence to back up your claims, or you don't
"but I would love to see evidence that it was actual game making companies that were shitting on their own costumer base"

You said that. Own up to it.

No i fucking didn't. You misrepresented me on this front already once before. I replied to you clarifying my already clear position and you never replied.

Ok, citation needed. Cite that I made these claims, give me a quote, because I didn't say any of this shit.
 

webkilla

New member
Feb 2, 2011
594
0
0
altnameJag said:
webkilla said:
and could it perchance be that some gamers simply do not like to be baselessly accused of being sexist?
I've been part of this "discussion" since 2012. I wouldn't call it baseless.
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.
Well, first you're going to have to find a bit where Sarkeesian says, out right and in context, "playing these games makes you sexist", then you're going to have to disprove the notion that media can reinforce, increase, or otherwise alter a person's belief system.

Because media can, will, and does alter people's beliefs and attitudes constantly. Games, through their interactivity, are in fact very, very good at it. And this goes both ways, before you try to claim I think video games are bad or anything. Game's and other media's ability to influence and inspire people to do great and good things is fantastic. I'd hate to live in a world where influential and moving pieces of art were unable to stir a person's emotions and attitudes towards things. Be downright dull, that.
oh you don't think its baseless, well let me see what you're basing that on then? Citation needed.

You still haven't shown me where video games like, I dunno - Mario where Princess Peach gets kidnapped - are somehow detrimental to society.

EDIT: and I don't have to prove anything. Sarkeesian are making claims in her videos. She is saying that video games reinforce negative stereotypes about women. She offers no evidence.

The burden of proof is on her. Not me.

That which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence. Try again
 

webkilla

New member
Feb 2, 2011
594
0
0
erttheking said:
webkilla said:
erttheking said:
webkilla said:
Well you asked how people in the gaming industry shit on their consumers. I provided answers.

You are not even paying attention to what I am saying. Didn't I say very early on that I don't care about Anita? She is not the only one capable of making claims about sexism in gaming. The right does not begin and end with her. I was making my own claims. Respond to MY claims. You are talking to ME!
No I didn't - and you complain that I misconstrue what you say?

And fair enough. You've previously expressed that you feel that video games where female characters are displayed are somehow bad - where is your proof that these games are bad, and I would also like it if you would quantify how they are bad - and of course prove that too.

Come on, get to it - you can't just keep dancing around this forever. At some point you'll have to admit that you either have evidence to back up your claims, or you don't
"but I would love to see evidence that it was actual game making companies that were shitting on their own costumer base"

You said that. Own up to it.

No i fucking didn't. You misrepresented me on this front already once before. I replied to you clarifying my already clear position and you never replied.

Ok, citation needed. Cite that I made these claims, give me a quote, because I didn't say any of this shit.
I did say that - but it was in a different context, and you know that you deceptive individual of ill intent. I said that in the context of your following statement:

"And yes, game companies are very fucking stupid. How many times have they pulled "PC Gaming is dead.""
source: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.949599-Controversial-Tropes-vs-Women-in-Video-Games-Series-Comes-to-an-End?page=9#23966042

AFAIK no gaming company has ever claimed that PC gaming is dead. Corrupt gaming journalists have said so, but no company ever. Citation needed.

That doesn't mean that there are gaming companies with shitty business anti-consumer business practices - but that does not equate to saying that PC gaming is dead. You may equate those two things, but they're not the same and you know it. And do realise that unless you actually take the effort to delete your old posts, then I can easily show how you are wrong in stuff like this.

Now what's next?

From the same post I linked above, you say: "People only bring up those problems when people are talking about the problems women have to face first." - I'm going to assume that by problem you're referring my original post where I point out some double standards in how men and women are treated.

"The problems women have to face first"

What problems do women have to face here? That some game companies use women as victims in video games?

How is that a problem. Define the problem. And then prove that it is a problem.

I mean it is a wonderfully vague statement. You never say what the problem is - just that it is a problem. That's why for the umpteenth time I ask: prove to me that some video games having women as victims is a problem for society. Or in any way - how is it bad?

...and you simply feeling that it is bad, is not a valid answer here. You know that right?
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Oct 5, 2011
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
webkilla said:
Buddy, I admitted that I was wrong on the PC gaming is dead front.
erttheking said:
And my apologizes, I honest to god can't find any direct quotes where a publisher directly said PC gaming is dead.
No need to beat a dead horse. You were right on that front.

In general. People only seem to bring up the problems that men have to deal with when they're trying to shit feminists up.

Women in Refrigerators. I have already given you a very detailed and in depth explanation as to why it's fucking lazy writing. You never responded to it.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.949599-Controversial-Tropes-vs-Women-in-Video-Games-Series-Comes-to-an-End?page=8#23964635

How would I solve it? Only having one female character with a major role, with that role being victim? Don't do that. Simple as that. Plenty of games are moving away from that and they seem to be doing just fine. The problem is that it's piss poor writing, limits story telling possibilities and, really, is just a stupid fucking cliche that doesn't enhance a story at all.

Do you?
 

webkilla

New member
Feb 2, 2011
594
0
0
erttheking said:
webkilla said:
Buddy, I admitted that I was wrong on the PC gaming is dead front.
erttheking said:
And my apologizes, I honest to god can't find any direct quotes where a publisher directly said PC gaming is dead.
No need to beat a dead horse. You were right on that front.

In general. People only seem to bring up the problems that men have to deal with when they're trying to shit feminists up.

Women in Refrigerators. I have already given you a very detailed and in depth explanation as to why it's fucking lazy writing. You never responded to it.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.949599-Controversial-Tropes-vs-Women-in-Video-Games-Series-Comes-to-an-End?page=8#23964635

How would I solve it? Only having one female character with a major role, with that role being victim? Don't do that. Simple as that. Plenty of games are moving away from that and they seem to be doing just fine. The problem is that it's piss poor writing, limits story telling possibilities and, really, is just a stupid fucking cliche that doesn't enhance a story at all.

Do you?
lazy writing?

That's not a problem - that's your opinion on a common form of game writing. You don't like it, fine - but AFAIK no game goes "Ok, now the girl is dead and you must avenge her, and as we know that's all women are good for, amirite?!"

Show me where games using that trope are doing harm to society or otherwise doing some bad to women. Employing commonly used tropes does not a detriment to society make - you not liking that trope doesn't make it problematic nor does it mean that it should never be done again. It just means you don't like it.

...and nobody is forcing you to buy these games
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,300
6,798
118
Country
United States
webkilla said:
You still haven't shown me where video games like, I dunno - Mario where Princess Peach gets kidnapped - are somehow detrimental to society.

EDIT: and I don't have to prove anything. Sarkeesian are making claims in her videos. She is saying that video games reinforce negative stereotypes about women. She offers no evidence.

The burden of proof is on her. Not me.

That which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence. Try again
How many sources would you like showing media reinforcing stereotypes? Always just one more? Do you have any logical reason to believe video games would be exempt where movies, tv, or books are not?
 

Jamcie Kerbizz

New member
Feb 27, 2013
302
0
0
altnameJag said:
webkilla said:
You still haven't shown me where video games like, I dunno - Mario where Princess Peach gets kidnapped - are somehow detrimental to society.

EDIT: and I don't have to prove anything. Sarkeesian are making claims in her videos. She is saying that video games reinforce negative stereotypes about women. She offers no evidence.

The burden of proof is on her. Not me.

That which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence. Try again
How many sources would you like showing media reinforcing stereotypes? Always just one more? Do you have any logical reason to believe video games would be exempt where movies, tv, or books are not?
In the first 'source' sudo-scientists gets triggered and rages about... article in 'Nature' - you know one of the most prestigious scientific journals (evaluating by number of citations) in the world... hmm whom to agree with here scientists or a raving (has even CAPS LOCK RAGE parts no joke...) ideologue who by his own words is outraged by a 'science-fiction piece of crap'. Sentence that would get him a warning or ban on Escapist... hmm tough choice indeed.
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Oct 5, 2011
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
webkilla said:
Well it's obvious it's my opinion isn't it? Everything on this board is opinion. Everything you've just been saying is your opinion, I don't see you labeling it as such though. Of course it doesn't, no game outright spells out the thought process behind it, that statement of yours doesn't actually prove anything. It's like saying no damsel in distress game says "Save the woman because it's your duty and maybe you'll get a quick fuck after." It doesn't do anything to make it less of a stupid and overdone trope. And I have to ask. Does anyone actually like it? Does anyone say "Oh man, if it wasn't for disposable love interests, this story wouldn't be the same."

Will you freaking get off that point already? I never said anything about that. Stop attributing arguments to me that I never said! AltnameJag seems more than willing to talk to you about that one, why not go to him, the guy who is ACTUALLY arguing that point, and not me, the guy who isn't. Seriously man, stop arguing past me.

You know, they don't exactly advertise the fact that a game will only have one female character that will get murdered for cheap tragedy points on the box. The whole "You don't have to buy them," argument, is just one of those "just shut up," arguments. It doesn't add anything, you just want me to shut up.
 

Jamcie Kerbizz

New member
Feb 27, 2013
302
0
0
erttheking said:
webkilla said:
Well it's obvious it's my opinion isn't it? Everything on this board is opinion. Everything you've just been saying is your opinion, I don't see you labeling it as such though. Of course it doesn't, no game outright spells out the thought process behind it, that statement of yours doesn't actually prove anything. It's like saying no damsel in distress game says "Save the woman because it's your duty and maybe you'll get a quick fuck after." It doesn't do anything to make it less of a stupid and overdone trope. And I have to ask. Does anyone actually like it? Does anyone say "Oh man, if it wasn't for disposable love interests, this story wouldn't be the same."

Will you freaking get off that point already? I never said anything about that. Stop attributing arguments to me that I never said! AltnameJag seems more than willing to talk to you about that one, why not go to him, the guy who is ACTUALLY arguing that point, and not me, the guy who isn't. Seriously man, stop arguing past me.

You know, they don't exactly advertise the fact that a game will only have one female character that will get murdered for cheap tragedy points on the box. The whole "You don't have to buy them," argument, is just one of those "just shut up," arguments. It doesn't add anything, you just want me to shut up.
It's perfectly true though. You don't need to buy these games. Even more, do not buy them (not just you, anyone) and developers will either go out of business or start making better games that suit people that refuse to buy what they peddle. It's that simple.
Instead of going about with false accusations and pretentious gloom and doom to society nonsense people, that don't like computer games should start making games they like and would enjoy. If these are better, people will buy them instead of current ones.

This is exactly same problem-solution situation we have with pre-orders, DLC's and garbage quality releases (latest being ME:A). People voice their valid objection to these things but yet majority of them buy in and play anyway.
Honestly, gamers lose a multipronged attricion war as consumers on so many fronts that adding to that ideological, impondarable facets is just brow rising self hatred. Yes, lets get milked by huge corporations and con artists while we dangle to tunes ideologues and marketing teams play to keep us busy and squabbling but most importantly paying for our hobby.
Paying ever staggering amounts of money for ever diminishing quality of products.
That just has to end well.
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,300
6,798
118
Country
United States
Jamcie Kerbizz said:
It's perfectly true though. You don't need to buy these games. Even more, do not buy them (not just you, anyone) and developers will either go out of business or start making better games that suit people that refuse to buy what they peddle. It's that simple.
Instead of going about with false accusations and pretentious gloom and doom to society nonsense people, that don't like computer games should start making games they like and would enjoy. If these are better, people will buy them instead of current ones.
How about if you enjoy a thing, but think it has flaws? Are you just not allowed to talk about those flaws or what? Does it have to be a 100% pass/fail binary?
 

CaitSeith

Formely Gone Gonzo
Legacy
Jun 30, 2014
5,343
358
88
webkilla said:
I know. What I want to know is where Anita Sarkisian is credited for the report. The "UN BROADBAND COMMISSION FOR DIGITAL DEVELOPMENT WORKING GROUP ON BROADBAND AND GENDER" incompetence on the report is their own fault.
 

Jamcie Kerbizz

New member
Feb 27, 2013
302
0
0
altnameJag said:
Jamcie Kerbizz said:
It's perfectly true though. You don't need to buy these games. Even more, do not buy them (not just you, anyone) and developers will either go out of business or start making better games that suit people that refuse to buy what they peddle. It's that simple.
Instead of going about with false accusations and pretentious gloom and doom to society nonsense people, that don't like computer games should start making games they like and would enjoy. If these are better, people will buy them instead of current ones.
How about if you enjoy a thing, but think it has flaws? Are you just not allowed to talk about those flaws or what? Does it have to be a 100% pass/fail binary?
Complaining for sake of complaining and making you feel better? Sure do that, gets you nothing but occasional slap from people annoyed by that.
I was talking about and to people who are interested in getting things improved the way they envision it. If someone just wants to moan how unhappy she/he is. Sure go ahead.
 

webkilla

New member
Feb 2, 2011
594
0
0
CaitSeith said:
webkilla said:
I know. What I want to know is where Anita Sarkisian is credited for the report. The "UN BROADBAND COMMISSION FOR DIGITAL DEVELOPMENT WORKING GROUP ON BROADBAND AND GENDER" incompetence on the report is their own fault.
well, she and Quinn presented it there: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3m-bcaCVbM

As for what she's credited with?

On page 25 of the report, in a segment where the report lists cases of 'violence', Sarkeesian has an entry. It reads:

Anita Sarkeesian
Feminist public speaker, media critic and blogger/founder of Feminist Frequency

Endured a campaign of sexist harassment including rape and deaths, personal webpages and social media were hacked, and personal information was distributed. She was sent images of herself raped by video game characters. Also a target of gamergate.

Now... nobody has ever been busted by the cops for this. The feds and cops looked at these supposed threats and just droppped the case. There are no reports of anyone actually ever being arrested or charged for these so called threats, which leads me to believe that there was nothing to them - or maybe... they were made up? But you know, gotta listen and believe.

Was her websites and social media hacked? I googled, but couldn't find any stories about that either

And she was sent nasty images? Right, sure she was. Was it something the cops and the feds saw as actual serious offences? No.
- but then again, Sarkeesian has stated that being told that you're wrong is a form of harasment, so... ya

and of course she "a target of Gamergate" because that's totally what GG was about. Totally.


that's the only time she's mentioned directly in the report - and IMO I think that's bad enough, because feeding the UN false information is not a nice thing to do. Half of this stuff has never been proven - that is, she has never really shown much of this, and for all the supposed threats she got, then she never went to the cops with it. She went to her kickstarter with it, to cry for victimbux. Sure sounds serious.

EDIT: updated to clarify a few things
 

webkilla

New member
Feb 2, 2011
594
0
0
erttheking said:
webkilla said:
Well it's obvious it's my opinion isn't it? Everything on this board is opinion. Everything you've just been saying is your opinion, I don't see you labeling it as such though. Of course it doesn't, no game outright spells out the thought process behind it, that statement of yours doesn't actually prove anything. It's like saying no damsel in distress game says "Save the woman because it's your duty and maybe you'll get a quick fuck after." It doesn't do anything to make it less of a stupid and overdone trope. And I have to ask. Does anyone actually like it? Does anyone say "Oh man, if it wasn't for disposable love interests, this story wouldn't be the same."

Will you freaking get off that point already? I never said anything about that. Stop attributing arguments to me that I never said! AltnameJag seems more than willing to talk to you about that one, why not go to him, the guy who is ACTUALLY arguing that point, and not me, the guy who isn't. Seriously man, stop arguing past me.

You know, they don't exactly advertise the fact that a game will only have one female character that will get murdered for cheap tragedy points on the box. The whole "You don't have to buy them," argument, is just one of those "just shut up," arguments. It doesn't add anything, you just want me to shut up.
"I never said anything about that" - you said it was a problem. You never specified what kind of problem it was. I asked for clarification, and now you're complaining that I shouldn't be asked for that, because its just an opinion.

and again, link: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.949599-Controversial-Tropes-vs-Women-in-Video-Games-Series-Comes-to-an-End?page=9#23966448

You said, and I quote: " 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."

"problems women have to go through"

again - what problems.

No I'm not going to stop hammering you on this. I want to know more about these problems you think women have in/with video games.

Because you said it.

Oh, and now you don't want me to argue that you can just ignore a game and not buy it? Because... its a "just shut up" argument?

You know what that sounds like? That sounds like you don't actually have a counter-argument, but don't want to admit it.


As for opinions: Dude, please pay attention. Sarkeesian has presented her opinions, in her videos, as if they are facts. She has not given evidence to support any of it. That is why I contest these claims, and hold that they can be dismissed.

You say that the above is just my opinion - and therefor somehow... less valid? Dude, I'm not the one who made a 'documentary series' - I'm the one questioning it. Her lack of evidence is a fact. You cannot dispute this. You have not disputed this.


Ultimately all I'm hearing from you is "I don't like these tropes being used, they offend me" - and seriously, do you honestly think that kids are playing Mario games because they want to fuck the Princess? Are you for real? Like really, are you for real? You do realise that Mario games are chiefly marketed to kids, right? Your argument there isn't really making sense.

Perhaps you should just admit that you don't like games that use this kind of trope - but also accept that these games aren't corrupting the youth or ending civilisation as we know it, because you can't prove that they do, even if you feel that that's what they're doing.
 

webkilla

New member
Feb 2, 2011
594
0
0
altnameJag said:
webkilla said:
You still haven't shown me where video games like, I dunno - Mario where Princess Peach gets kidnapped - are somehow detrimental to society.

EDIT: and I don't have to prove anything. Sarkeesian are making claims in her videos. She is saying that video games reinforce negative stereotypes about women. She offers no evidence.

The burden of proof is on her. Not me.

That which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence. Try again
How many sources would you like showing media reinforcing stereotypes? Always just one more? Do you have any logical reason to believe video games would be exempt where movies, tv, or books are not?
Oh dear, someone finally tried to back up their argument here. Oh going through sources - brings back fond memories of when I wrote my master thesis.

and of course, to stay on topic we are certainly still talking about video games here, right? You didn't just try to move the goal-posts and expand our discussion to include ALL forms of media, right? Because that would be really disingenuous, almost tantemount to trying to derail this little debate. I certainly hope that you weren't trying to do that - because that would be naughty.


So, lets have a look.

Your claim: "video games reinforces stereotypes". (again, we were talking video games, not all kinds of media in existance, lets stay on topic)

Lets see how your sources back that up.

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/science-sushi/the-joke-isnt-funny-its-harmful/
- this is a blog. It doesn't really have much content on its own, but it links to more things. I would take this more seriously, if you had linked directly to the relevant things mentioned in this blog post, so I don't have to sift through all the chaff.
- it starts out with being offended over a tiny bit of science fiction, that jokingly talks about how women are so much better shoppers than men. Because that's offensive
- no that's not really relevant here.
- in fact, it doesn't seem to talk much about video games at all.
- oh hold on, here we go:
- it cites a study that claims to prove that reminding young girls that they are girls, lowers their test scores
- hold on, are you citing a source that claims that women are emotionally frail and can't handle challenges as well as men?

(that's like... sexist, isn't it? sexist science?)

Whelp, that is actually an argument against having women shown in video games.

At all.

As in, this study would support the notion of having all video game characters either be gender neutral or male because having female playable characters would make it more difficult for women and girls to play challenging games, if we allow ourselves to go from challenging tests to challenging games. IMO its not that big a leap.
- oh is that not the conclusion I'm supposed to make from that source? I'm sorry, but that's what the study it cited is pointing towards.
- Congratulations Alt, you played yourself. On your first citation. Top kek.

How about we just skip ahead to the next source you link?

http://krytyka.org/gender-stereotypes-in-mass-media-case-study-analysis-of-the-gender-stereotyping-phenomenon-in-tv-commercials/
- krytyka.org? what on earth is this. Oh, its another blog. Lovely
- You know, I was expecting some direct citations of scientific studies and whatnot, not blog posts, but lets have a look
- analysis of gender stereotyping in TV commercials
- wow that sounds totally like they're talking about video games. Oh wait, no they don't
- please only cite things related to video games.

That's two down

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4343312/
- well what do you know, an actual study of sorts
- oh boy did you even read the abstract?
- pardon me, sides are in orbit

Ok, alt - you're good at this. And by 'this' I mean playing yourself.

Here's part of the abstract talking about the results of the study:

"Adolescents who played video games frequently showed decreased concern about the effects that games with negatively stereotyped images may have on the players? attitudes compared to adolescents who played games infrequently or not at all. With age, adolescents were more likely to view images as negative, but were also less likely to recognise stereotypic images of females as harmful and more likely to judge video-game playing as a personal choice."

Breaking that down, you get:

- teens who played vidya cared less and less about what a game MIGHT have on your attitude
- keyword here is might. They didn't prove jack that that games did anything - only that players cared less.
- could it perchance be that they cared less, because they had recognised that they weren't really affected by it?
- its almost as if even teens can tell the difference between video games and reality, and don't start thinking that they have to stomp turtles after playing Mario.
- and when older, they did start caring a little more about some of these negative portrayals, but were less likely to recognise stereotypical images as harmful
- again, almost as if with age they simply figured that saving a princess in a game, while stereotypical, doesn't actually hurt anyone or brainwash anyone into becoming sexist
- the study certainly doesn't prove anything to the contrary

So ya. Congrats, you played yourself x 2, top kek harder: mega hard.

Next sources! (oh this is fun)

http://escholarship.org/uc/item/8xm9j2kf#page-1
"The Impact of Negative Stereotypes & Representations of African-Americans in the Media and African-American Incarceration"
- damn, that sounds very video game related. I can't even get over how video game related this sounds.
- oh wait... its not
- sorry alt, we're talking video games here. That's strike two for totally irrelevant sources.

Next round, batter up:
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2014-03/osu-pab031914.php
- ok, points for another actually seemingly relevant source
- "Playing as black: Avatar race affects white video game players"
- hmm, the page only gives a brief overview of the study, everything is in summary
- kinda hard to use a source when you don't have access to all of it. Shame on you for trying to sneak crap like that under the radar
- but ok, lets see what we do have:

The study claims that white college students would be more aggressive after playing violent video games, if they played as black characters, and would have more negative attitudes towards black people, and would link black people more to weapons.

Right, but how did they test this?

They had people play Saints Row 2 with either a black or a white player character.

Whelp - then its a good thing that the Saints Row series isn't a hilariously violent games series, originally designed to be a parody of the GTA series, allowing for extreme feats of exagerated violence and mayhem. IIRC it was in SR2 that you could hijack a tanker truck full of sewage and hose down suburban neighborhoods for in-game cash. Ya that totally sounds like a game that doesn't just beg the players to do violent and stupid things. Great test material (no not really)

Now, with this game they tested a whopping 121 white university students, 60% of which were male. Not that big a sample, and from the way it was written then they were probably all from the same university. That doesn't exactly make the sample very representative.

and results of that test? apparently it showed that the players who played the black characters had stronger negative attitudes towards blacks. Really? How did they discover that?

Apparently the players who played with black avatars were then given an "Implicit Association Test (IAT), which is designed to reveal unconscious bias"

They were tested for thought crime. Good heavens.

They tested so the people who ran the study could make an estimate of what these people weren't even aware of that they were thinking. You do realize that when you've reached the level where you're basically acusing people of thinking things they aren't aware that they're thinking, that you're just making stuff up, right?

You do realize that the notion of unconcious bias has sort of been debunked, right?

here's a nice article from the national review on that:
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443723/implicit-bias-debunked-study-disputes-effects-unconscious-prejudice

and here a very in-depth look at the IAT, questioning its methods and surrounding hype
http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2017/01/psychologys-racism-measuring-tool-isnt-up-to-the-job.html

So... that's half of that source in the trash can.

What other test did they do?

Oh... they had 141 white students, 65% female, play two fighting games - and then afterwards they gave the people who had played black characters in those fighting games the IAT.

and surprise surprise, of course those players who had just played fighting games with black characters, associated black people more with weapons.

You know, I know for a very scientific fact that if you show someone a 20 minute documentary about french race car drivers and then ask them afterwards if their association between french people and racing has increased, then you'll find that that has indeed increased.

And again, the IAT test - because gotta map out those thought crimes.

No, that source goes into the trash.


That's five done, and five down - but I'll give you props for trying, especially with the last one. It almost looks legit, until you actually check how they did their study.

Dude, with the IAT I can prove ANYTHING. Give the test to a neo-nazi, and I can give you test results showing that he's secretly a pacifist vegan. Those tests can be interpreted to yield anything. They are so loaded with weasel-words (like saying 'all media' instead of just video games, hint hint) that you can prove or disprove anything with those tests.


But ok, the last five real quick because even I can't stay amused with this for so long:

http://oregonstate.edu/ua/ncs/archives/2017/apr/social-media-tools-can-reinforce-stigma-and-stereotypes
- its about social media, not video games. That's strike three for off-topic sources.

source number 7: the "one" link
http://sites.psu.edu/christiercl/2014/04/02/why-stereotypes-are-bad/
- "why stereotypes are bad"
- its a blog post
- it boils down "people like don't like being stereotyped"
- strike four. Did you even try with this one?

https://web.stanford.edu/class/e297c/poverty_prejudice/mediarace/portrayal.htm
- oh, Stanford. Lets get down with that spicy science
- "Portrayal of Minorities in the Film, Media and Entertainment Industries"
- oh...
- its about movies and television
- strike five (that makes half our sources completely off topic, for shame)

source number 9: the "have" link
http://sites.psu.edu/christiercl/2014/04/02/why-stereotypes-are-bad/
- this is the same source as number 7
- how about some unrelated facts, since this source has nothing new to offer?
- Fun fact: I have worked as a teacher
- I would not just fail a student for padding out their assignments with copy-pasta
- I would politely ask them if they seriously thought that they had any business studying.
- maybe you should ask yourself if you have any real business doing discussion dance? Because you're not doing it very well

And finally, the last one:
https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/stereotypes-do-reinforce-status-quo
- oh another stanford, lets hope its better than the last
- "Stereotypes Do Reinforce the Status Quo"
- Blog post
- about stereotypes
- nothing about video games specifically
- but I can see why you find this relevant.
- its referring to a study, but doesn't link to it
- it just summaries
- apparently test subjects were chiefly quizzed on their level of support of 'the current state of gender relations' and the US political and economic systems
- right...

Again, it doesn't look into whether video games teach people these things. It doesn't even mention use of the IAT, which surprises me.

I'll give you this: I'll agree to a certain extent that steretypes can help reinforce the status quo - but you've shown nothing that supports the notion that video games reinforce bad stereotypes.

I'm sorry alt - but you have NOT convinced me. And with over half your links completely irrelevant to the topic of video games, then I think you need to consider simply admitting that you don't really have any proof for what you're claiming.

Oh I'll support the notion that you believe what you're saying is true - but belief is one thing, supporting evidence is another.



How about I give you some spicy counter-arguments, proving that video games do not make you more sexist?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27619379
"The Impact of Degree of Exposure to Violent Video Games, Family Background, and Other Factors on Youth Violence."
- it finds no link between playing violent vidya and youth violence.
- not strictly linked to treatment of women, but if your complaints about women being stereotyped are to be believed, then these games should have resulted in more women being assaulted. I mean, one would think that you'd have tried to prove that playing vidya results in more women being hurt IRL due to negative stereotypes of women being helpless victims?

https://heatst.com/tech/study-finds-video-games-have-no-impact-on-violent-crime/?mod=sm_tw_post
- the URL sort of reveals it all
- similar to the last study, only this is an article summarising another study.
- it does link to the actual study

but ok, lets move away from the "video games make you violent" stuff

http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/videogames-dont-make-you-violent-or-sexist/16849#.VZ_tU_ntlBc
- how about a study showing that video games do not make you sexist OR violent?
- sadly, it doesn't link directly to the study

but I did find this paper from the guy who did the same study:
http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/cyber.2013.0245
"Who Believes Electronic Games Cause Real World Aggression?"
- TL:DR is that people who don't really play vidya think it makes you more violent. The above papers sort of hint that they're wrong.

And finally:

http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/cyber.2014.0492
"Sexist Games=Sexist Gamers? A Longitudinal Study on the Relationship Between Video Game Use and Sexist Attitudes"
- TL:DR is that its a study that ran for THREE YEARS, tested if the same people who played vidya became more sexist because of vidya
- they found no evidence of increases in sexism caused by video games
- feel that burn? that's you having no real proof to support your claims, and me having far more salient documentation to support my counter argument that vidya does make you sexist.


Now, you're free to have a go at the sources I've given and try to discredit them, as I have done the sources you've given - though, from my point of view right now? It looks like you've sort of played yourself, using bad sources, including one that sort of pushed towards a solution I think you would very much disagree with.

Feel free to admit that you can't prove that video games are making people more sexist. I'll await your reply, dreaming of spicy memes and super srs bsns blog posts about hurt fee fees. Oh you are a gem.

and don't you dare go TL:DR on this - you gave me ten sources to read through, now its your turn - or you can just admit that you're wrong.
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Oct 5, 2011
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
webkilla said:
Oh for the love of-that was a complete different set of circumstances. It was you bringing up the fact that men are depicted as being raped in fiction, and it's usually played for comedy. Something that usually contributes to the BS idea that men can't be raped IRL, and I thought that you were saying something along the lines of "While women are complaining men have to deal with this!" and I was venting about you changing topics and only bringing up that problem when we were talking about women. Looking back though, I'm not certain you actually care about those men though.

You are just going to keep claiming that I said something about it affecting women in real life in a severe social way. The problem they have to face? Dealing with their gender being poorly represented in gaming. Don't know why you're so determined to make a mountain out of a molehill.

Yeah, it is a "shut up" argument, hate to break it to you buddy. Because, as I've said, these games don't exactly advertise themselves as killing the only female character that they have for cheap points. It's like saying ignore games that have twist endings. Please tell me how the fuck I'm supposed to feasibly do that.

Stop talking about Anita. You are the only one who cares. I do not care. I repeat, I do not fucking care about her. I don't know why you can't fucking let it drop, but she is not part of this conversation.

And all I hear from you is "I refuse to acknowledge any flaws in gaming and I'm going to keep trying to derail this topic."

You tried to make my argument being my opinion make it sound less valid. All I was pointing out was that it was my opinion vs your opinion. So no, I'm not implying that your opinion is worth less. And you say I need to pay attention. Practice what you preach.

Can you just not type up a reply without putting words in my mouth? I never fucking said that. I say games don't advertise themselves in an incredibly blunt manner like that, not that kids play games for that. Kindly stop making stuff up about what I say.

You just can't stop making shit up about me for three seconds. Corrupting the youth? Fuck's sake. Hey, get back to me when you actually reply to arguments I already made.
 

Parrikle

New member
Apr 9, 2015
14
0
0
webkilla said:
Now... nobody has ever been able to find any police reports of any these threats. But you know, gotta listen and believe.
I don't think I'll listen and believe. Instead, I'll take the comments by the San Francisco Police Department, who not only acknowledged that reports had been made, but that they had passed them on to the FBI. Perhaps a quick check of Google would help before making claims like this.

Was her websites and social media hacked? I googled, but couldn't find any stories about that.
Again, a few seconds on Google finds this covered in The Guardian, Kotaku, The Conversation and the Vancouver Observer. That's without putting any effort into this. Are you sure you Googled?