Flash Game Makes Players Beat Up "Tropes vs. Women" Creator

[runic knight]

The history may be a bigger part then you know. We have a long history of male-centered societies and with it a long history of stories. Games love to draw from stories and themes common within, it is little wonder you see the same things popping up. Rescue the princess anyone?

Yeah my mind went strait to nursery stories, like Rapunzel, sleeping beauty, Cinderella you name it. Rescue the princess is a pretty common theme, it makes sense than at a time when most games were directed at children they would include familiar themes from children stories. So we still have peach needing rescue.

Although princesses being royalty probably didn't have much time to figure out how to do things for themselves so its not entirely based upon her gender. There's also some message there about the working class Mario rescuing the princess peach thereby showing that the plucky common man is your real hero. Which seems to be the more modern twist there, its not a prince or knight rescuing her you notice.

Kind of like how Bruce Willis in die hard is just some cop, contrasted against the high and mighty types in authority who inevitably get things wrong.

This is also still reflected in part in culture and in gender identity, which perpetuates, is rebelled against and melds into the culture. I wouldn't say there is a natural polarization, but that does seem a bit of how the culture has encouraged. Battle of the sexes and all that. It is less drastic now, but does seem to be noticeable in everything from advertisements (that damned annoyingly stupid motor mouth wife commercial) to games.

The reason I think of a natural polarisation is from animal studies there does appear to be some kind of psychological dimorphism in humanity, it seems relatively small (more like gibbons than gorillas, and nothing like ants) but I wonder how hard marketers like to pull on those strings which could result in a significant reinforcement.

I find the historical idea most convincing, which would lead to the belief that it should recede as new stories are created and the concepts spread and develop naturally. Which may have already begun. Would that mean the real social change comes from stories than from movements?

I hadn't thought of the common man theme in mario. That was a good catch, and worth looking into I think.

As for the polarization, I don't know. It may be self-feeding. They market to what the culture has dictated to them is the norm for the gender, which in turn fuels the next generation who do the same. I can certainly see advertising taking advantage to natural or culturally traditional roles, especially noticeable in toys like dolls v. nerf guns.
As for new stories, that is hard to say. Some last, most fade. Hard to determine which ones influence culture and how much, but I wouldn't deny a certain appeal to the idea that the storyteller can leave a lasting impression on generations to come in a way politicians only wish they could. But since so many stories are merely reflections of cultural norms, it is hard to explain shifts and changes fully on story influence. Life imitates art imitates life sort of cycle perhaps?

 

[Calibanbutcher]

Is this only a problem when men hassle a woman?
Or would anyone also defend a man, who gets harassed by women?

 

[willbailes]

Wow, this gets more heated than religious arguments.

Each anecdotal story of sexism, like this flash certainly is, is not evidence of a sexism problem. Each time Hilary Clinton is called a "*****" is not evidence of sexism, after all plenty of male politicians are vilified. However, it is hard not to argue that this kind of hate, this indignation, comes from a different place, a much deeper place, than the normal knee-jerk mud people throw for fun.

I'm guilty of saying racist things that if heard out of context would get me in trouble, but I'm not a racist because I know that those feelings are wrong and would never act on them. Fake-beating up a person for fun just because they have an opinion, and a harmless opinion at that, is evidence that you don't mind acting on your hate, which means its temptation is greater than your ability to suppress it.

Why should a person suppress hate? Because it never leads to good things. I look at the tropes-women host and see no hate, plenty of disappointment and anger, but no hate. I'm sure locked up inside she wishes just to punch the living hell out of the nearest sexist, but I know she wouldn't cause that does nothing but perhaps make her feel good.

Sexism is a problem like racism is still a problem. People still have irrationally strong hatreds and disrespect of people that help nothing but make them feel good. This woman is biased and a little too much for me sometimes, but she, if not done any good, has done no harm. therefore, any hate toward her for this is irrational and strong, so the community can only assume its from a deeper, more permanent place.

 

[KafkaOffTheBeach]

This is fucking stupid.

Ignore the misogyny, I know it's hard, but ignore it.
Ignore Jim Sterling and Tim Schafer for a moment.
Ignore 4chan.
The most ludicrous thing about this whole fucking internet drama is that people have paid money for someone to make a 'talking head' vlog about videogames. Something that umpteen people on Youtube do for free on a regular basis.
People have paid $160,000 for someone to make a vlog about videogames.

But wait, there's more.
People, and by people I mean 90% Male backers, have paid $160,000 for someone to make a vlog about videogames where the vlogger has already decided upon the outcome of her investigation.
She only added in the, and I feel totally justified in saying this, the token 'Positive Portrayals of Women in Videogames' episode after she made over three times the amount that she asked for.
She will do literally nothing with $160,000.
She will squander this brilliant opportunity to highlight a genuine problem in videogames.

Do you want to know why?

Watch her other videos.
Read her fucking thesis.
That kind of shit isn't 'analysis', nor is it even feminism. It is simply generic outrage based around the word 'woman' without any care for, oh, I dunno, the texts.

This actually sounds like a good idea. The person putting this idea in motion, however, is going to fuck it up, and yet people gave her actual money so that she can make an ineffectual video series that will contradict itself on an absolute smorgasboard of points. For evidence of the above, simply look at her episode titles. It doesn't take a fucking lawyer to work out the mental u-turns on that long and unnecessary road.

Hell, she used Faith as an example for a positive feminist role model.
Y'know...that character that was only memorable for her incredible design.

Whatever.

Look, what happened here is simple:
Members of 4chan and other sites forgot one rule: "Don't feed the troll."
But they fed the troll, and then bleeding heart white knight motherfuckers thought that 4chan was the troll, so they ended up feeding the even bigger troll.
But the joke here is that they fed the troll money and attention.
And so the cycle continued until the kickstarter ended.

And another thing, while I'm writing words that no-one will read on an article that is a week old with over a thousand comments for people to be irate at, if you think that her previous videos were smart or in any way insightful, then you are wrong. Objectively, empirically wrong.
They are a streamlined introduction to feminism for very stupid people.

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

I take it you are new to the Internets, as well as to AS. For one, Antia is an anti-sex feminist. Most of her complaints on subjects involves sex & less sexism. Less exploitation of sexuality & more sexuality being present. Her file sharing criticisms, her bayonetta criticisms, her link to conservative sexual repression.

Proof? I have never seen her do this in any of the videos I have ever seen. Link me to these claims of hers, because they are well against what I understand her positions to be. I find it infinitely more likely that you are misunderstanding her claims and arguments, whether purposefully or accidentally.

By that last one i mean the link drawn when she said ads might encourage sexual assault, in relation to the cop that said how a woman dressed was directly linked to the odds she might be raped.

Okay, right here, stop. This is a perfect example of how you don't actually know what you're talking about.

The cop that inspired the SlutWalk movement said something about how women shouldn't dress "slutty" to avoid being raped. This is a textbook example of victim blaming - the burden is on the WOMAN (the victim, in this case), to avoid being raped (when in reality rape is done by someone she knows the vast majority of the time, the clothes you wear have nothing to do with it, and you should have the right to walk down the street ass naked and not be raped). It is putting the burden on the victim.

Sarkeesian's argument is that an advertisement which encourages people in a subway train to "strip" Bayonetta contributes not to the VICTIM'S likelihood of being groped/assaulted/molested on a train, but contributes to the PERPETRATOR'S mindset, even if only subtly. It has nothing to do with the fact that Bayonetta is mostly naked covered only by her hair in an advertisement and everything to do with people being asked to strip her.

The two are entirely different arguments, and again, Sarkeesian is arguing against the exploitation of womens' sexuality, not that it exists.

But more in depth is good, with her bayonetta criticisms(having never played the game) she criticisms her poses, her sexuality, & claims hero only positive is being a single mother. That the character is in command of her sexuality means fuck all, which would be a stance an anti-sex 'feminist' would take.

I don't necessarily agree with her Bayonetta arguments, but you are ignoring the very real fact that the character (developed by men) is being posed like this (by male modelers and developers) for the titillation of the Male Gaze. Slow pans over her crotch as she uncrosses and recrosses her legs, really? Do we really need those? Whether or not Bayonetta owns her sexuality in the context of the fiction doesn't mean that the things that the (real life) developers do is immune to criticism.

She makes no distinction between sexuality & objectification.

I have yet to see her criticizing the sexuality that a real-life woman chooses to display. I have seen her criticizing how male writers/filmmakers/game makers exploit that sexuality. So yes, she actually does, unless you can find me a link otherwise.

We also see she may be averse to intimacy with a loved one, based on her criticisms of 'all i want for Christmas is you' during her Christmas song criticisms. When everyone else hears 'all i want for Christmas is you', implying the singer is speaking to a loved one; antia hears it as 'i need a man for Christmas or else i am worthless'. Stating it as sexist. Implying she is either anti-sex, anti-man, or off her rocker. If i had to pick i would go with options A & C. Like it or not, Sarkeesians videos exhibit an anti-sex position, if not an intense hangup on sex in general.

Again, I don't agree with all of her criticisms (though some Christmas songs are pretty fucked up; "Baby it's cold outside" is pretty messed up when you think about it), but I have yet to see this anti-sex position you keep talking about. It is anti-exploitation of female sexuality by men.

And let's face it, society as a whole has an intense hangup on sex no matter who you are.

And there is a line of thinking(term used loosely) that is under the umbrella of feminism, that entails woman over man in all walks. Note that while it is under the umbrella, it is not actually feminism. It is only called feminism because the idiots that believe in it think that's what it is, & everyone kept on calling it feminism. You want to find them? Go to Tumblr or youtube, & shoot a rubber band into the air. Odds are that it would hit someone that thinks women are superior. Unreasonable to a fault, if you piss one off i suggest you conceal your identity, they like trying to ruin peoples lives through the internet. Like it or not they exist. Fortunately they are only found on the internet... Well to my knowledge they don't. Be honest the idea of finding out of they exist beyond the web makes me afraid. very, very afraid.

No, i am most certainly not one of those. In fact i am probably that asshole that spends way too much time telling them how wrong they are.

Diehard social justice extremists are a bit much for me, though I would counter by saying, shoot a rubber band into the air at Reddit and you'll invariably hit some scumbag MRA or one of the many many misogynists that unfortunately pervade "nerd" culture.

Again, wanting to stop the exploitation of men by women, which in some cases means promoting women over men IN CERTAIN RESPECTS to address already-unequal states, is not entailing "woman over man in all walks."

I once again suggest that you please educate yourself as it is pretty clear you have a decent head on your shoulders, you just... don't understand a lot of the arguments.

Snip.

You miss the point.
Why does she need money for research at all? Why can't she use Let's Play's or emulators and roms?

Because... she wants to do it legally? If she's become a public figure, she can't well just emulate or pirate modern games, because then she'd be making herself a target for anti piracy lawyers. That's an infinitely stupid suggestion.

And why not Let's Plays, well, as we see here people are complaining that she doesn't actually play the games herself. So.........?

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

You know what's funny? If it was a guy's face on the flash game getting beat on until inflammation occurs, no one would say a word. Heck, I'm sure there would be a good number of females who would find it funny.

Equality? Yeah right.

that does make this any less digusting

like I said before "this isnt equality! shes being sexist against men! so lets beat the ***** up! that'll show'em"

show'em your scum mabye

Honestly, I don't care that people have done this with her. It's been done before with men, and no one has said a single thing outside "Well, he's not THAT big of a douche..." but when it's a woman, everyone is up in arms and ready to take out the chivalry stick.

And do not take this as condescending:

Let me clue you in on something. You know what actually IS holding back equal treatment? Reactions like this. As long as there is special treatment/awareness detail/defending women to a chivalrous length, you cannot have equality. Honestly, if women want equality, they are going to have to look at this and shrug and say "Eh, they make beat up flash games about a lot of things. This is no different."

This is not being overly chivalrous, or somehow saying that women are weak and need to be protected. This is about recognizing that there has been for centuries (if not longer), a history of keeping women "in their place" via violence and the threat of violence. Calling this out for perpetuating that culture of silence-via-violence is a good thing.

It'd be pretty fucked up if it were, say, a "beat up a black man" or "beat up a Jew" game, too, because again, there is a history there of violence against marginalized and disenfranchised groups. Refer to my earlier point [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/7.381107.15048153] about how power factors into this.

 

[twohundredpercent]

lol linking his own post. Look at Mr. Ego ova here.

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

Parhaps this would help to undertand the game maker position?

She spammed 4chan on June the 5th? The day she set up the kickstarter?

Even though she started the Kickstarter three weeks prior to that? And the first reported case of harrassment happened on June the 4th? And that picture used was one that:

Spoiler

Anyone could find and use?

Compelling evidence.

Granted there was one linked for May 17th (she made the kickstarter on the sixteenth) but I find it odd that the harrassment didn't happen until like three weeks later. Or that no one ever talked about it, nor was it ever used as 'evidence' against her until after the harrassment attack had blown over.

Simple fact is, anyone could have done that. A determined fan, a troll looking to bring about aggression towards her or any other reason. It could have been her but frankly I think that it's kind of unlikely.
We know SOMEONE spammed 4chan, not that she did. And until we have irrefutable evidence, I'd like it if people didn't try to use it against her and get ideas into the heads of the people who spammed and in some cases continued to spam during the Kickstarter event.

And regardless what this idiot seems content to ignore is that, far from the reason people are angry, the way they did it is unacceptible and is the reason people demonize them. Trying to seize her funds, having her videos marked as terrorism, spamming her inbox with threats of rape and death, making this little flash game and of course trying to seize her personal work and home number and her home address to post online so that it is entirely possible, though unlikely, for some psychopath to actually track her down and cause her harm.

"Waaaah she maybe potentially spammed 4Chan despite there being no solid evidence that it was her, a member of her group or that she was even aware of it! She's so meeeeeaaaann"

Grow up.

Seriously I wish people in the gaming community would stop scrambling around desperatley trying to find a way to demonize her or at least make it seem like the army of misogynist trolls are somehow not responsible or even worthy of praise. The Penny Arcade Kickstarter's been up for a while, and they are asking for way more. Where are the rape and death threats? Where's the 'beat them up' flash game? Where's the army of tinfoil hat BS videos trying to paint them as criminal masterminds? There aren't any because it's as naked and clear to see before everyone is that this outrage had fuck all to do with Anita asking for money.

The fact that anyone would convey their 'legitimate complaints' with any of the things I mentioned above, let alone all and more then yes game journalists should demonize them. Because this is not what rational people do when they are met with something they disagree with, this is what hate groups do!

If you don't want to be demonized then don't be a fucking demon.

There is no situation, ever where these people come out looking good. I just wish they would hurry up and understand that. Even if she did spam 4chan (I'm willing to accept that it is possible that she or someone else did) this reaction is still not acceptible and I'd still rather be on her side rather than the misogynist horde.

Because above all else she's proven that misogynist trolls are self defeating, their efforts to aggressively spam her out of existence and silence her only gave her more attention, funded the project several hundred times its original amount and made a lot more people aware and express disgust at them in the process.
They lost, and frankly that's not a bad thing where I sit.

Also check her tweets sometime: https://twitter.com/femfreq (July 2 specifically (sorry I don't know how to link individual tweets).

She IS using the money the way she said she was going to. Further debunking the 'scam' argument.

Thank you for this. I love the "If you don't want to be demonized..." argument.

Also, link to individual Tweets by clicking on the timestamp (in this case, July 2). For example:

using the Kickstarter money as promised [https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/220005905742303232].

Wait a minute, 100 games?

Games cost about $60, don't they?

100 x $60 is... wait, wait a minute, I can figure this out.

Oh wow, that's $6000! What a coincidence, that's exactly what she asked for!

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

lol linking his own post. Look at Mr. Ego ova here.

If you're talking to me, I just didn't want to have to type out again what I'd already written, broseph.

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

You know what's funny? If it was a guy's face on the flash game getting beat on until inflammation occurs, no one would say a word. Heck, I'm sure there would be a good number of females who would find it funny.

Equality? Yeah right.

that does make this any less digusting

like I said before "this isnt equality! shes being sexist against men! so lets beat the ***** up! that'll show'em"

show'em your scum mabye

Honestly, I don't care that people have done this with her. It's been done before with men, and no one has said a single thing outside "Well, he's not THAT big of a douche..." but when it's a woman, everyone is up in arms and ready to take out the chivalry stick.

And do not take this as condescending:

Let me clue you in on something. You know what actually IS holding back equal treatment? Reactions like this. As long as there is special treatment/awareness detail/defending women to a chivalrous length, you cannot have equality. Honestly, if women want equality, they are going to have to look at this and shrug and say "Eh, they make beat up flash games about a lot of things. This is no different."

This is not being overly chivalrous, or somehow saying that women are weak and need to be protected. This is about recognizing that there has been for centuries (if not longer), a history of keeping women "in their place" via violence and the threat of violence. Calling this out for perpetuating that culture of silence-via-violence is a good thing.

It'd be pretty fucked up if it were, say, a "beat up a black man" or "beat up a Jew" game, too, because again, there is a history there of violence against marginalized and disenfranchised groups. Refer to my earlier point [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/7.381107.15048153] about how power factors into this.

This is not silencing her and you can't compare this to 'beat up generic black man'. If it was beat up Obama or bet up Seinfeld no one would care.

Intentionally or no, it is contributing to a campaign to silence her via getting her funding pulled and her videos flagged as terrorism, to say nothing of the direct harassment she's received herself. This is inarguable.

Refer to my earlier point about power. Obama has power in that he is rich, male, and the most powerful man in the world. And a "beat him up" game would still have uncomfortable racial implications.

None of this exists in a vacuum.

Also, how do you know a Let's Player will check out everything you want to check out? Will they talk to everyone in an RPG, etc? You don't. This is a ridiculous suggestion that is now just blindly reaching for things to criticize this Kickstarter on.

And considering that she's already bought 100 games [https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/220010476325703680], it seems we know what she's spending her money on. As she said she would be.

It's almost like it... wasn't a scam?

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

Edit: oh and people can lie on twitter so this isn't proof of anything.

Jesus Christ almighty, are you for real? Really, really for real?

You're that strapped for actual, coherent arguments against her that you've resorted to "WELL MAYBE SHE'S LYING ABOUT DOING IT"?

Holy hell, I am done with your privileged ass. Don't bother responding to me, or anyone else in this thread, until you get a clue.

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

Edit: oh and people can lie on twitter so this isn't proof of anything.

Jesus Christ almighty, are you for real? Really, really for real?

You're that strapped for actual, coherent arguments against her that you've resorted to "WELL MAYBE SHE'S LYING ABOUT DOING IT"?

Holy hell, I am done with your privileged ass. Don't bother responding to me, or anyone else in this thread, until you get a clue.

Run away then you couldn't respond to one of my posts anyway.

And if she's going to bring up that people can lie on 4chan then I'm bringing up that people can lie on twitter.

And don't try to pretend being "privileged" invalidates anything I say, (especially coming from someone who probably doesn't have to work in a sweatshop and is thus privileged too).

Yes, as a white male I am privileged. I know that. And I know how to fucking examine that privilege and how it shapes my worldview. You, on the other hand, don't.

I have responded to every single one of your posts worth responding to and completely dismantled your ignorant arguments. You do not understand the topic you're trying to argue about, even on the most basis Intro to Gender Studies 101 level, and it shows.

I have no idea what inanity you're trying to get to with "if she can bring up that people can lie on 4chan," since Sarkeesian hasn't even mentioned 4chan as far as I've seen. But there is a tremendous disconnect between 4chan's anonymity, where agreeing with your own comments is pretty much commonplace, and where the people spamming her kickstarter could have been ANYONE (including people who didn't actually care about it - ESPECIALLY them, from my experience with 4chan - and who were just trolling the other users); and someone posting a bold faced lie on a public twitter account with thousands of followers.

That you cannot see the difference is your own failing. Not mine. Get a clue.

 

[DioWallachia]

SNIP

Just for full disclosure, did you watched his next 2 videos about it?

 

[rbstewart7263]

You know what's funny? If it was a guy's face on the flash game getting beat on until inflammation occurs, no one would say a word. Heck, I'm sure there would be a good number of females who would find it funny.

Equality? Yeah right.

that does make this any less digusting

like I said before "this isnt equality! shes being sexist against men! so lets beat the ***** up! that'll show'em"

show'em your scum mabye

Honestly, I don't care that people have done this with her. It's been done before with men, and no one has said a single thing outside "Well, he's not THAT big of a douche..." but when it's a woman, everyone is up in arms and ready to take out the chivalry stick.

And do not take this as condescending:

Let me clue you in on something. You know what actually IS holding back equal treatment? Reactions like this. As long as there is special treatment/awareness detail/defending women to a chivalrous length, you cannot have equality. Honestly, if women want equality, they are going to have to look at this and shrug and say "Eh, they make beat up flash games about a lot of things. This is no different."

This is not being overly chivalrous, or somehow saying that women are weak and need to be protected. This is about recognizing that there has been for centuries (if not longer), a history of keeping women "in their place" via violence and the threat of violence. Calling this out for perpetuating that culture of silence-via-violence is a good thing.

It'd be pretty fucked up if it were, say, a "beat up a black man" or "beat up a Jew" game, too, because again, there is a history there of violence against marginalized and disenfranchised groups. Refer to my earlier point [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/7.381107.15048153] about how power factors into this.

Ok for the record Im only saying this for clarification only I dont support the "beat up the black/ jew thing" But your point seems to be that there has been a historical bias in marginalizing them/using them as a resource. this is true the slave trade was one of the worst things that ever happened.

however africans particularly nubians had slaves as well in the 25th century.

Ancient Egypt conquered Nubian territory in various eras, and incorporated parts of the area into its provinces. The Nubians in turn were to conquer Egypt under its 25th Dynasty.

There was slavery under nubian rule though it is known that it was not a fixture enough for it to be well recorded.

Later there culture would be combined with that of egyptian(Nubian pharoahs for example) and the trend would increase as time went on.

Egyptians would also have nubian slaves and this would go back and forth it would seem. Its hard to know of a decisive victor since the cultures would merge to become indistinguishable to one another.

So this is contrary to the notion that africa has ALWAYS been the victim and indeed were the agressors.

So in my view the english catch all the flack as though it were only white people to use slaves. The english and french were simply the LATEST in a long history of power struggles in the world to use it.

This runs contrary to the notion that africans are perpetual victims by others. Indeed sometimes they were on top and sometimes not so.

And to summarize its the same with Jewish culture having its ups and downs too.They too participated in the slave trade though not as much as hitler would later claim.

an you can look all this up a simple google:"nubians had slaves" or "jews owned slaves" to find all of the info here.


again I just wanted to dimantle the common notion that "teh white man is the only bad man ever" which is prevalent today.

 

[DioWallachia]

This is fucking stupid.

Ignore the misogyny, I know it's hard, but ignore it.
Ignore Jim Sterling and Tim Schafer for a moment.
Ignore 4chan.
The most ludicrous thing about this whole fucking internet drama is that people have paid money for someone to make a 'talking head' vlog about videogames. Something that umpteen people on Youtube do for free on a regular basis.
People have paid $160,000 for someone to make a vlog about videogames.

But wait, there's more.
People, and by people I mean 90% Male backers, have paid $160,000 for someone to make a vlog about videogames where the vlogger has already decided upon the outcome of her investigation.
She only added in the, and I feel totally justified in saying this, the token 'Positive Portrayals of Women in Videogames' episode after she made over three times the amount that she asked for.
She will do literally nothing with $160,000.
She will squander this brilliant opportunity to highlight a genuine problem in videogames.

Do you want to know why?

Watch her other videos.
Read her fucking thesis.
That kind of shit isn't 'analysis', nor is it even feminism. It is simply generic outrage based around the word 'woman' without any care for, oh, I dunno, the texts.

This actually sounds like a good idea. The person putting this idea in motion, however, is going to fuck it up, and yet people gave her actual money so that she can make an ineffectual video series that will contradict itself on an absolute smorgasboard of points. For evidence of the above, simply look at her episode titles. It doesn't take a fucking lawyer to work out the mental u-turns on that long and unnecessary road.

Hell, she used Faith as an example for a positive feminist role model.
Y'know...that character that was only memorable for her incredible design.

Whatever.

Look, what happened here is simple:
Members of 4chan and other sites forgot one rule: "Don't feed the troll."
But they fed the troll, and then bleeding heart white knight motherfuckers thought that 4chan was the troll, so they ended up feeding the even bigger troll.
But the joke here is that they fed the troll money and attention.
And so the cycle continued until the kickstarter ended.

And another thing, while I'm writing words that no-one will read on an article that is a week old with over a thousand comments for people to be irate at, if you think that her previous videos were smart or in any way insightful, then you are wrong. Objectively, empirically wrong.
They are a streamlined introduction to feminism for very stupid people.

I had a nerdgasm by reading LOGIC and FACTS after a long time. Would you have my childrens?

 

[Frankster]

snip of truth

Best summary of situation i've seen so far, plz find your cookie enclosed in the mail along with coupon for free internetz.

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

You know what's funny? If it was a guy's face on the flash game getting beat on until inflammation occurs, no one would say a word. Heck, I'm sure there would be a good number of females who would find it funny.

Equality? Yeah right.

that does make this any less digusting

like I said before "this isnt equality! shes being sexist against men! so lets beat the ***** up! that'll show'em"

show'em your scum mabye

Honestly, I don't care that people have done this with her. It's been done before with men, and no one has said a single thing outside "Well, he's not THAT big of a douche..." but when it's a woman, everyone is up in arms and ready to take out the chivalry stick.

And do not take this as condescending:

Let me clue you in on something. You know what actually IS holding back equal treatment? Reactions like this. As long as there is special treatment/awareness detail/defending women to a chivalrous length, you cannot have equality. Honestly, if women want equality, they are going to have to look at this and shrug and say "Eh, they make beat up flash games about a lot of things. This is no different."

This is not being overly chivalrous, or somehow saying that women are weak and need to be protected. This is about recognizing that there has been for centuries (if not longer), a history of keeping women "in their place" via violence and the threat of violence. Calling this out for perpetuating that culture of silence-via-violence is a good thing.

It'd be pretty fucked up if it were, say, a "beat up a black man" or "beat up a Jew" game, too, because again, there is a history there of violence against marginalized and disenfranchised groups. Refer to my earlier point [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/7.381107.15048153] about how power factors into this.

Ok for the record Im only saying this for clarification only I dont support the "beat up the black/ jew thing" But your point seems to be that there has been a historical bias in marginalizing them/using them as a resource. this is true the slave trade was one of the worst things that ever happened.

however africans particularly nubians had slaves as well in the 25th century.

Ancient Egypt conquered Nubian territory in various eras, and incorporated parts of the area into its provinces. The Nubians in turn were to conquer Egypt under its 25th Dynasty.

There was slavery under nubian rule though it is known that it was not a fixture enough for it to be well recorded.

Later there culture would be combined with that of egyptian(Nubian pharoahs for example) and the trend would increase as time went on.

Egyptians would also have nubian slaves and this would go back and forth it would seem. Its hard to know of a decisive victor since the cultures would merge to become indistinguishable to one another.

So this is contrary to the notion that africa has ALWAYS been the victim and indeed were the agressors.

So in my view the english catch all the flack as though it were only white people to use slaves. The english and french were simply the LATEST in a long history of power struggles in the world to use it.

This runs contrary to the notion that africans are perpetual victims by others. Indeed sometimes they were on top and sometimes not so.

And to summarize its the same with Jewish culture having its ups and downs too.They too participated in the slave trade though not as much as hitler would later claim.

an you can look all this up a simple google:"nubians had slaves" or "jews owned slaves" to find all of the info here.


again I just wanted to dimantle the common notion that "teh white man is the only bad man ever" which is prevalent today.

...modern history, dude. Yes, african empires used slaves. Pretty much EVERYONE in antiquity used slaves. But that has nothing to do with a history of racism and oppression in, specifically, America.

I mean by your logic, we should still be angry at the Greeks or Mongolians for conquering huge swaths of the world.

 

[JerrytheBullfrog]

If you have watched her videos you should already know this.

I have watched her videos. I still do not see what you are talking about. Can you link me to some specific videos where you think she is anti-sex/sex-negative? Because of the ones I've seen, it's just been her against exploitation thereof. As the one making the claim that I find doubtful, the burden of proof is on you, friend.

I have had it up to my ears with the male gaze bull shit. Because every other time i hear it it means that the girl ONLY exists for sexual purposes, she has no purpose to plot, she has no use otherwise, & its always a negative thing. Reality is, the woman that founded the theory didn't think it to be a bad thing. Enough of that though, so that the writer writes in a strong female character, means fuck all. I dont believe that. A writer is trying to make an interesting character, & sex should not be excluded from their personality if you can make it fit. Just because the writer was male doesn't remove the fact that the character is in charge of their sexuality, or make sexuality a bad thing. But that he wrote her where she uses her sexuality makes him wrong & the character invalid?

I've had it up to my ears with the male gaze bullshit too, but I think we mean it in slightly different ways

And no, sorry, you seem to seriously misunderstand what the male gaze is. There's an excellent Gamasutra article on the subject which I recommend reading. It does not mean that a female character is completely irrelevant to the plot, it does not mean that she is necessarily a weak character, etc - it just implies that she is portrayed (sexually) in certain ways that male characters wouldn't, all for the visual/sexual titillation of a male reader. This does not instantly make her a terrible or weak character, but it does weaken her character in that it objectifies her in ways that it does not treat her male counterparts.

Male authors, directors, and game designers are perfectly capable of creating works without the male gaze (though it's difficult; many of them don't realize they're doing it). It is not something one automatically does when creating fiction as male.

This does not mean that we shouldn't call them out on it. Is one instance of an objectified female character the end of the world? No. But when you take it all together, it's problematic.

Because that's all Sarkeesian does. Hell, she criticized bastions character Zia, as 'the female' (a misrepresentation of the trope 'the chick'), seeming like she never played the game. Just watch her videos, i cant keep watching them to explain them.

I haven't played Bastion, sorry. You'll have to explain to me this one.

As for her Christmas arguments? If she had done research then 'Baby its cold outside' would look a lot less bad given that roofies weren't a substance as we know it until 30 years after the song was released. The other criticisms of it were interpreting it as the male being aggressive, rather than her being conflicted with wanting to stay & what others might think. But by this point im putting up resistance just for the hell.

Uh, the criticism of "Baby It's Cold Outside" Has. Absolutely nothing to do with roofies. It has everything to do with that the man is making sexual advances that are being rebuffed by the woman. Yes, it's portrayed as sweet/romantic/cute, but... it does undermine the essence of No Means No.

And do not dare defend tumblr/youtube straw-feminists. These bitches are insane, And no they don't mean some spaces; they mean everything. Thats the group we are talking about. Thats the group that should never be called feminist. They dont want equality, if it were biologically possible for humanity to survive without the male half they would jump at the chance.

I'm just saying, I don't think insane MRAs are any better. Both genders have their militants.

Edit: Just in case you misunderstand, anti-sex feminism is basically just feminism with a negative outlook on sex & sexuality. Should be called 'sex-negative' or some other variation, but nothing we can do about that.[/quote

I got what you were getting at. I just don't see it in her videos.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

I could care less either way, but why censor the flash creator? Shes thrusted herself into the public eye so shes fair game to whatever people want to do or say or create about her.

It hasn't been "censored", it's just been voted to be a shit game, and due to NG's rules, it get's removed.

As said before, NG has far worse games, both in quality & content, this game was blammed because of the subject matter.

Even then, NG's rules for submission covers this sort of thing (i.e. Hateful submissions), so we can't single it out there either.

And yet, right now on Newgrounds, you can play a game called "Election Madness" where you "Beat your political opponent to pieces by using kicks, punches, combos, TV's, pianos, and more! Choose between Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John McCain in this hilarious knockout!"

From their FAQ:

Q: What can I do if I find an inappropriate movie in any of the Portals?

A: If a movie is racist, excessively pornographic, personally threatening, or generally much more offensive than regular Newgrounds fare, there is a good chance we don't want it here. If a user deems a movie inappropriate for the Portal and the entry is still under judgment, he/she can blow the whistle using the appropriate whistle option. If the entry has passed judgment users should contact us, and be sure to include the submission's URL and a brief description about why they think it is a problem. We will then look into the submission and decide if the movie/game stays or goes.

Personally threatening, which I think we can agree that the submission in question is.

Does it actually threaten her? Does it say the designer is going to beat her up or does it encourage people to beat her up Irl? Because if not then it seems like it's just venting.

Dude, this guy made a flash game about beating her up. Just think about that for a moment. What do you think this asshole would like to do to her?

So you think everyone who enjoys GTA really wants to murder people?

Every election season in the U.S. you see dart boards with one of the presidential candidates in the center, they're gag items and they aren't marketed to fundies or anything.

Hell newgrounds has tons of flash games where you get to kill celebrities.

EDIT: Come to think of it, whether he actually wants to beat her up or not is irrelevant. It's only a threat when he says he's going to do it.

And all of this is irrelevant, NG has decided that it's against their submission rules, so it's against their submission rules. Because weirdly enough, they're NG's rules.

 

[rbstewart7263]

Nay by my logic we shouldn't be angry at anyone.