Serious question for feminist critique of video games

[josak]

Also, I made it pretty clear that it wasn't "Sarkeesian + video games = good female characters." She's part of a larger trend of people talking and writing about this stuff, which existed before her obviously (though I do think the attack on her Kickstarter brought the issue to the forefront of the culture). And those weren't examples of games with female protagonists (again, you assume I said something I didn't! "straw-man"), they were examples of developers making a demonstrable effort to make their games more inclusive with stronger female characters.

I am aware you did not say it. But "more female protagonists" is another of the main points, one that gets focused on a whole damn lot, and to be completely honest; I'm pretty confident that Sarkeesian herself wouldn't give TLOU and Bioshock Infinite too much credit because in both those games the female characters lack agency, they're still serving more as plot devices than independent characters. She tends to take issue with female characters lacking agency as she has demonstrated time and again so it's a pretty safe assumption to make. And coupled with the fact that the best way to give a character agency is to make them the protagonist...

Secondly, your claim was that Sarkeesian's approach is "working" and that it's evident in how developers make an effort to make stronger and better-written female characters. You did nothing to back that up, since what you'd need to show is a demonstrable influence from Sarkeesian's approach that caused such efforts, or indeed, that there are efforts that (would) have not existed before this entire thing exploded in the first place.

"Raising awareness" is a pretty expression to use, because it implies one's actually putting some serious contribution towards tackling the issue. But I'm a rather cynical old curmudgeon, so I see especially this kind of "raising awareness" as a bunch of hot air. Hot air is nice and all because you can do plenty useful stuff with it, but it's not who produces the hot air that should be looked upon with admiration and respect, it's the one who harnesses it. Of course; nothing prevents one from harnessing their own hot air, but you don't do that by producing even more hot air.

Look around the site you are on, or go look at the videos from the gem this site once had "Extra Credits" Yahtzee, Movie Bob, Jim Sterling and Extra Credits have all been talking about this issue (women in gaming)and all of them have backed the claim that serious work is required in this field, several of them (among many other important voices in gaming) have mentioned Sarkeesian by name, hell Sarkeesian even works as a consultant for a triple A game maker now.

If you can't see the change that has been wrought it's because you don't want to but it's clear as day. She made sexism in gaming a mainstream issue, I don't agree with her on whole bunch of stuff but she is right on the central issue, games have a problem with their portrayal of women. The mainstream media has been reporting on this because of the waves Sarkeesian made.

This is always how non violent change occurs by causing debate and conversation, by making an issue topical, now gamers including myself look at portrayal of women in games with a far more critical eye and that inevitably means bad, stereotypical and harmful portrayals are slowly on the way out.

 

[Vegosiux]

Look around the site you are on, or go look at the videos from the gem this site once had "Extra Credits" Yahtzee, Movie Bob, Jim Sterling and Extra Credits have all been talking about this issue (women in gaming)and all of them have backed the claim that serious work is required in this field, several of them (among many other important voices in gaming) have mentioned Sarkeesian by name, hell Sarkeesian even works as a consultant for a triple A game maker now.

What happens when it stops being a popular issue?

If you can't see the change that has been wrought it's because you don't want to but it's clear as day. She made sexism in gaming a mainstream issue, I don't agree with her on whole bunch of stuff but she is right on the central issue, games have a problem with their portrayal of women. The mainstream media has been reporting on this because of the waves Sarkeesian made.

I'll see a "clear as day" change when I can join a random multiplayer lobby and not have to grit my teeth through a bunch of immature douchebags in the first ten minutes. I'll see a "clear as day" change when I can look over the current hot titles and not wonder where all the well-written female leads are. I'll see a "clear as day" change when some work actually gets done, because as long as we're just talking about how this and that has to be done and thinking we're being the force that drives the change...well...hot air, as I said, cookies go to the people who turn it into substance.

Yes, I want a better representation of all characters, more variety, better writing, and the end of constant treadmill of same cliches with a slightly different paint job. But Anita Sarkeesian does not speak for me. Neither does MovieBob, neither does His Magnificence Jim Sterling, and so on. I might happen to agree with each on them on some points, but they do not speak for me, but my participation is not "being a part of anything they have stirred up or are stirring up."

This is always how non violent change occurs by causing debate and conversation, by making an issue topical, now gamers including myself look at portrayal of women in games with a far more critical eye and that inevitably means bad, stereotypical and harmful portrayals are slowly on the way out.

"Harmful" as in?

And I've always hated stereotypes, poor writing and lazy storytelling. Think I consider certain tropes and cliches bad because of all this? No, I've always considered them bad.

On a marginally related note, I've also always hated idolization of individuals when it comes to paradigm shifts in the society - without people actually investing themselves into bringing those shifts, those individuals are nothing. But I get it, that's also a power fantasy after all. We all want to be just a little bit like Martin Luther King and stuff.

Call me cynical, if you want. You'd be right about that.

 

[Gindil]

Look around the site you are on, or go look at the videos from the gem this site once had "Extra Credits" Yahtzee, Movie Bob, Jim Sterling and Extra Credits have all been talking about this issue (women in gaming)and all of them have backed the claim that serious work is required in this field, several of them (among many other important voices in gaming) have mentioned Sarkeesian by name, hell Sarkeesian even works as a consultant for a triple A game maker now.

What happens when it stops being a popular issue?

It stopped being a popular issue a LOOOONG time ago. The "journalists" are carrying the issue while the gaming community has a very different opinion of Anita.

If you can't see the change that has been wrought it's because you don't want to but it's clear as day. She made sexism in gaming a mainstream issue, I don't agree with her on whole bunch of stuff but she is right on the central issue, games have a problem with their portrayal of women. The mainstream media has been reporting on this because of the waves Sarkeesian made.

I'll see a "clear as day" change when I can join a random multiplayer lobby and not have to grit my teeth through a bunch of immature douchebags in the first ten minutes. I'll see a "clear as day" change when I can look over the current hot titles and not wonder where all the well-written female leads are. I'll see a "clear as day" change when some work actually gets done, because as long as we're just talking about how this and that has to be done and thinking we're being the force that drives the change...well...hot air, as I said, cookies go to the people who turn it into substance.

You might want to look at Extra Credits' new video "Overlooked". That's where you'll find some well written female protagonists along with the answer to the True Female Characters issue.

This is always how non violent change occurs by causing debate and conversation, by making an issue topical, now gamers including myself look at portrayal of women in games with a far more critical eye and that inevitably means bad, stereotypical and harmful portrayals are slowly on the way out.

"Harmful" as in?

And I've always hated stereotypes, poor writing and lazy storytelling. Think I consider certain tropes and cliches bad because of all this? No, I've always considered them bad.

On a marginally related note, I've also always hated idolization of individuals when it comes to paradigm shifts in the society - without people actually investing themselves into bringing those shifts, those individuals are nothing. But I get it, that's also a power fantasy after all. We all want to be just a little bit like Martin Luther King and stuff.

Call me cynical, if you want. You'd be right about that.

[/quote]

Uhm... Comparing Anita to MLK? That's really a stretch considering her dishonest proceedings with this entire series.

 

[Madmonk12345]

This is always how non violent change occurs by causing debate and conversation, by making an issue topical, now gamers including myself look at portrayal of women in games with a far more critical eye and that inevitably means bad, stereotypical and harmful portrayals are slowly on the way out.

"Harmful" as in?

And I've always hated stereotypes, poor writing and lazy storytelling. Think I consider certain tropes and cliches bad because of all this? No, I've always considered them bad.

On a marginally related note, I've also always hated idolization of individuals when it comes to paradigm shifts in the society - without people actually investing themselves into bringing those shifts, those individuals are nothing. But I get it, that's also a power fantasy after all. We all want to be just a little bit like Martin Luther King and stuff.

Call me cynical, if you want. You'd be right about that.

Uhm... Comparing Anita to MLK? That's really a stretch considering her dishonest proceedings with this entire series.

Careful. Search that comment for where he actually compared Anita to MLK, because I can't find it; the closest I see is "We all want to be just a little bit like Martin Luther King and stuff." which is at best stating that Anita Sarkeesian's followers might want to be a little like MLK, which doesn't mean we are comparing, just providing motivation for the "devil", if you will(not that I feel that she's anywhere as bad as you're stating or even overall negative at all, but I'm not interested in that debate, which has already been made by people better than me; if they aren't able to convince you, then I most certainly won't.)

Double check your quotes before you respond or you just end up looking stupid.

Keep in mind that I don't even agree with the quoted commenter; I'm just pointing out a pretty obvious misreading that could be an opportunity for personal reflection that you would have otherwise missed.

 

[Gindil]

Careful. Search that comment for where he actually compared Anita to MLK, because I can't find it; the closest I see is "We all want to be just a little bit like Martin Luther King and stuff." which is at best stating that Anita Sarkeesian's followers might want to be a little like MLK, which doesn't mean we are comparing, just providing motivation for the "devil", if you will(not that I feel that she's anywhere as bad as you're stating or even overall negative at all, but I'm not interested in that debate, which has already been made by people better than me; if they aren't able to convince you, then I most certainly won't.)

Double check your quotes before you respond or you just end up looking stupid.

Keep in mind that I don't even agree with the quoted commenter; I'm just pointing out a pretty obvious misreading that could be an opportunity for personal reflection that you would have otherwise missed.

Actually, the comparison was done recently on the PBS Show:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UrazpEFb9w

That's why I'm very leery of someone saying that Anita's work is similar to the civil rights movement. We'll leave the argument about his glasses having no frames for another debate...

And in terms of dishonest...

Her Kickstarter was spammed on 4chan by those in her party (given that this was one of the first threads spammed, I'm linking it here) - http://archive.foolz.us/v/thread/139813364/

She ran to the media saying she hasn't said anything while taking down the Bayonetta video that she did which was done before her TvW series - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbihPTgAql4

There was actually a thread here with information where her backers were doing the research for her. That has been taken down recently.

Then there's the entire debacle where she says to her students that she's not a gamer while telling the press she's been playing since she was 5 or 10. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcPIu3sDkEw

Finally, there's the fact that she's used Let's Play footage instead of recording her own. That's not necessarily a HUGE thing, but think about it... You were paid to be a researcher and you want your work to be presented in academic settings. Yet you can't maintain your own integrity while creating controversy on your own series? - http://victorsopinion.blogspot.com/2013/07/anitas-sources.html

These are just a few of the larger criticisms of Anita's work which haven't gotten much air with her supporters who still go with the story of "she dared to speak up" or "she got attacked for being a woman". You can take these with as many grains of salt as you want to. But when gamers are the ones looking into these things, finding out that someone has basically lied and manipulated people for a social agenda, don't you think you'd be asking questions too?

 

[josak]

Look around the site you are on, or go look at the videos from the gem this site once had "Extra Credits" Yahtzee, Movie Bob, Jim Sterling and Extra Credits have all been talking about this issue (women in gaming)and all of them have backed the claim that serious work is required in this field, several of them (among many other important voices in gaming) have mentioned Sarkeesian by name, hell Sarkeesian even works as a consultant for a triple A game maker now.

What happens when it stops being a popular issue?

If you can't see the change that has been wrought it's because you don't want to but it's clear as day. She made sexism in gaming a mainstream issue, I don't agree with her on whole bunch of stuff but she is right on the central issue, games have a problem with their portrayal of women. The mainstream media has been reporting on this because of the waves Sarkeesian made.

I'll see a "clear as day" change when I can join a random multiplayer lobby and not have to grit my teeth through a bunch of immature douchebags in the first ten minutes. I'll see a "clear as day" change when I can look over the current hot titles and not wonder where all the well-written female leads are. I'll see a "clear as day" change when some work actually gets done, because as long as we're just talking about how this and that has to be done and thinking we're being the force that drives the change...well...hot air, as I said, cookies go to the people who turn it into substance.

The issue is already there and it will remain there.

Change that you can see on t at very drastic level takes time, getting rid of the d-bags you mention may not even be possible but as I mentioned we now have feminists consulting for games and that is a clear indication that game companies are putting thought into this, so in a year or so when these games are released I expect to see a shift and I think it's illogical to expect otherwise.

All change starts as hot air, unless it's violent.
Yes, I want a better representation of all characters, more variety, better writing, and the end of constant treadmill of same cliches with a slightly different paint job. But Anita Sarkeesian does not speak for me. Neither does MovieBob, neither does His Magnificence Jim Sterling, and so on. I might happen to agree with each on them on some points, but they do not speak for me, but my participation is not "being a part of anything they have stirred up or are stirring up."

This is always how non violent change occurs by causing debate and conversation, by making an issue topical, now gamers including myself look at portrayal of women in games with a far more critical eye and that inevitably means bad, stereotypical and harmful portrayals are slowly on the way out.

"Harmful" as in?

And I've always hated stereotypes, poor writing and lazy storytelling. Think I consider certain tropes and cliches bad because of all this? No, I've always considered them bad.

On a marginally related note, I've also always hated idolization of individuals when it comes to paradigm shifts in the society - without people actually investing themselves into bringing those shifts, those individuals are nothing. But I get it, that's also a power fantasy after all. We all want to be just a little bit like Martin Luther King and stuff.

Call me cynical, if you want. You'd be right about that.

 

[josak]

Careful. Search that comment for where he actually compared Anita to MLK, because I can't find it; the closest I see is "We all want to be just a little bit like Martin Luther King and stuff." which is at best stating that Anita Sarkeesian's followers might want to be a little like MLK, which doesn't mean we are comparing, just providing motivation for the "devil", if you will(not that I feel that she's anywhere as bad as you're stating or even overall negative at all, but I'm not interested in that debate, which has already been made by people better than me; if they aren't able to convince you, then I most certainly won't.)

Double check your quotes before you respond or you just end up looking stupid.

Keep in mind that I don't even agree with the quoted commenter; I'm just pointing out a pretty obvious misreading that could be an opportunity for personal reflection that you would have otherwise missed.

Actually, the comparison was done recently on the PBS Show:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UrazpEFb9w

That's why I'm very leery of someone saying that Anita's work is similar to the civil rights movement. We'll leave the argument about his glasses having no frames for another debate...

And in terms of dishonest...

Her Kickstarter was spammed on 4chan by those in her party (given that this was one of the first threads spammed, I'm linking it here) - http://archive.foolz.us/v/thread/139813364/

She ran to the media saying she hasn't said anything while taking down the Bayonetta video that she did which was done before her TvW series - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbihPTgAql4

There was actually a thread here with information where her backers were doing the research for her. That has been taken down recently.

Then there's the entire debacle where she says to her students that she's not a gamer while telling the press she's been playing since she was 5 or 10. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcPIu3sDkEw

Finally, there's the fact that she's used Let's Play footage instead of recording her own. That's not necessarily a HUGE thing, but think about it... You were paid to be a researcher and you want your work to be presented in academic settings. Yet you can't maintain your own integrity while creating controversy on your own series? - http://victorsopinion.blogspot.com/2013/07/anitas-sources.html

These are just a few of the larger criticisms of Anita's work which haven't gotten much air with her supporters who still go with the story of "she dared to speak up" or "she got attacked for being a woman". You can take these with as many grains of salt as you want to. But when gamers are the ones looking into these things, finding out that someone has basically lied and manipulated people for a social agenda, don't you think you'd be asking questions too?

The comparison is more than apt, people said exactly the same thing when civil rights movements figures compared their movement to the abolition of slavery, the truth is any movement struggling for equal treatment can quite honestly compare itself to the civil rights movement.

 

[Infernai]

Don't like your government? Why not go overthrow it and make a new government? I mean, honestly, you have no right to criticize your government if you're not actively trying to overthrow and change it.

I'm going to need ten thousand sticks of dynamite, 500 assault carbines, ammo, grenades, able soldiers, a documentary crew, and Morgan Freeman narrating said documentary

 

[Gindil]

The comparison is more than apt, people said exactly the same thing when civil rights movements figures compared their movement to the abolition of slavery, the truth is any movement struggling for equal treatment can quite honestly compare itself to the civil rights movement.

No. It's not. As I've pointed out, there's a LOT of problems with Anita and her "critique". She got mean things said to her and got some money.

If you want to put her on the same pedestal as MLK, Rosa Parks, and others while she maintains a view that she should segregate busing for women, then that's not truly someone to believe in for civil rights.

 

[Robert Marrs]

I am NOT saying that if you dont like [media] then just make your own. I am saying that if you spent the better part of your like complaining about something and you have enough money to combat it by making a game the way you think it should be (or hireing people to do it for you if you have no design experience yourself), it is hypocritical not to do so . because you cant expect to have other people make the world better for you if you have the means yourself but just dont want to do it.

Her Kickstarter was funded to make videos. She has to use the money earned to fulfil her obligations to backers before she can use any excess money for other things.

Just a thought but she already had a youtube channel right? All her other videos on that channel are of the exact same production quality as the ones she is putting out now. Did she ever even need a kickstarter? Maybe just to draw attention to the videos but that is it. She got $180,000 for being a professional victim. Troll baiting 4chan users and then using the backlash as a "see look everyone hates me because i am a woman speaking up!". Regardless of whether or not you agree with the actual subject matter that is pretty shameful. How much of that money did she need to make a few videos about video games? Videos which have been way behind schedule I might add.

 

[senordesol]

From her vantage point; Ms. Sarkeesian has stirred up greater debate on gender roles and issues in video games with her little video series than a self-published ever could.

You may disagree with her methods, you may find her disagreeable as a person, but for all that she was damned effective for what she set out to do. So the real question is: why would she do as you suggest (make her own video game) when she's doing more to motivate conversation right where she is (and is sure to secure greater backing with subsequent Kickstarters to boot)?

 

[Vegosiux]

Your quote marks are a little off here. That said;

The issue is already there and it will remain there.

The issue has been there before she talked about it. If most people were blind to it, that's not my problem.

Change that you can see on t at very drastic level takes time, getting rid of the d-bags you mention may not even be possible but as I mentioned we now have feminists consulting for games and that is a clear indication that game companies are putting thought into this, so in a year or so when these games are released I expect to see a shift and I think it's illogical to expect otherwise.

We have one outspoken feminist consulting for one particular game, Mirror's Edge 2 I believe. But since feminism is, I'm told, a state of mind that "Women are people too", again, so I've been told, I'm pretty sure the industry has been rife with feminists before she came along.

But this is kind of my point. Such changes take time, they take resources, they take a consensus of sorts. They take a lot of people working together.

With a degree of hyperbole; in a few years, if such a shift indeed happens, are you going to say "Well, seems the devs and publishers got their act together and now offer more variety and better writing", crediting those who got their shit together and knocked their work up a notch, or are you going to say "Well, glad that Anita Sarkeesian came along, she made this all possible!", as if she's some kind of I dunno, game industry messiah, who brought wisdom to ye unwashed masses?

 

[2HF]

EDIT: I am NOT saying that if you dont like [media] then just make your own.

why doesnt she just become a video game designer herself .

That sounds like exactly what you're saying. You're using the ol' "if you love it so much then why don't you marry it" attack and it's ridiculous, you can't marry inanimate objects.

I don't like the way the music industry is shifting, let me throw everything in my life away to go become a record executive/musician and change everything! While I'm at it I'll become a film industry legend by directing/producing/acting/doing absolutely everything. I'll also become president of the world and cure cancer and colonize Mars.

You can't change everything by changing everything. You can change the things you can change by being heard by those already in the position to change the things that need changing.

 

[Yuuki]

(and is sure to secure greater backing with subsequent Kickstarters to boot)?

I have a good feeling that's never going to happen again, at least not anywhere to the same degree. What Sarkeesian has done is considered more of a black mark and carries far too much negativity. Yes it got people talking about gender issues in gaming, but not in a good way. It's an absolute fucking mess and carries a negative aura, carries far too much tension - as a result many people are simply done and don't want to hear about it again.
Not to mention Anita hasn't exactly delivered, almost everyone is in agreement that nowhere near $158,000 was needed to do what she is doing. I think one or two people are releasing similar videos with with even better quality of presentation+discussion for $0.

The first round was, and you have to admit this is true, a metric shit-ton of people coming to Anita's rescue when she was dogpiled by flamers. I consider it an automatic societal reaction to a damsel in distress (irony!) because we're still hard-wired to think that way. MANY people donated money purely to make a statement against the trolls/haters.

I just don't think that's going to happen again.

 

[senordesol]

(and is sure to secure greater backing with subsequent Kickstarters to boot)?

I have a good feeling that's never going to happen again, at least not anywhere to the same degree. What Sarkeesian has done is considered more of a black mark and carries far too much negativity. Yes it got people talking about gender issues in gaming, but not in a good way. It's an absolute fucking mess and carries a negative aura, carries far too much tension - as a result many people are simply done and don't want to hear about it again.

The first round was, and you have to admit this is true, a metric shit-ton of people coming to Anita's rescue when she was dogpiled by flamers. I consider it an automatic societal reaction to a damsel in distress (irony!) because we're still hard-wired to think that way. MANY people donated money purely to make a statement against the trolls/haters.

I just don't think that's going to happen again.

Time will tell, of course. Stephenie Meyer's twilight saga was one of the most despised pieces of trite media in recent memory and yet it still made bank.

Fame tends to carry someone farther than merit.

 

[Vegosiux]

Fame tends to carry someone farther than merit.

I feel that this needs to be capitalized...

THAT IS NOT A GOOD THING.

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

Ah, the old "Well if you're so smart why don't you do it better yourself?" argument. Which sounds like something a 5-year old would say to me.

No matter how you look at it, case Sarkeesian brought up discussion and exposed the rampant sexism lurking behind the friendly facade of the games industry, for better or worse. She couldn't have done that by merely making a game where the women weren't sex objects.

Now face the wall.

 

[Estelindis]

Just a thought but she already had a youtube channel right? All her other videos on that channel are of the exact same production quality as the ones she is putting out now. Did she ever even need a kickstarter? Maybe just to draw attention to the videos but that is it. She got $180,000 for being a professional victim. Troll baiting 4chan users and then using the backlash as a "see look everyone hates me because i am a woman speaking up!". Regardless of whether or not you agree with the actual subject matter that is pretty shameful. How much of that money did she need to make a few videos about video games? Videos which have been way behind schedule I might add.

In my opinion, that is irrelevant. Firstly, she did not ask for an exorbitant amount. Secondly, people freely chose to support her project and there's nothing wrong about that; people are entitled to spend their money on whatever they choose. Third, her obligation is to use the Kickstarter money to fulfil the promises that she made to her backers, not to please anyone else. If, once the series is done and she has fulfilled those promises, she still has some of the money left over (I think I'd be quite surprised if this wasn't the case), then she is then entitled to do whatever she pleases with it (though if she chose to funnel some of it into games that would do a better job on gender compared to those she's criticised then I think it would reflect well on her). Finally, the phrase "professional victim" is insulting on several levels. It implies that you have more of a problem with the abused than with her abusers and that those who backed her project were stupid and didn't know what they were doing. They knew. They chose. (I sincerely doubt that anyone who backed the project when it was at $100k believed that it would be impossible to make the videos if it wasn't funded further - but they chose to give extra money anyway.) If what other people freely choose to do with their money bothers you, then I suggest that you find a way to cope with it.

Regarding the schedule of her videos, personally I do not have a problem with it. But then I'm used to waiting for George R. R. Martin books.

 

[generals3]

If you can't see the change that has been wrought it's because you don't want to but it's clear as day. She made sexism in gaming a mainstream issue, I don't agree with her on whole bunch of stuff but she is right on the central issue, games have a problem with their portrayal of women. The mainstream media has been reporting on this because of the waves Sarkeesian made.

This is always how non violent change occurs by causing debate and conversation, by making an issue topical, now gamers including myself look at portrayal of women in games with a far more critical eye and that inevitably means bad, stereotypical and harmful portrayals are slowly on the way out.

Is that change relevant though? Many people talk about the evils of violence in VG's. Didn't prevent thousands of violent videogames to be produced.

In order to have change the change has to happen. Many things get stuck at "being talked about". And here's my question, have you recently not purchased a game because of your new more critical eye? And do you believe that there is a statistically significant amount of other gamers who did just that as well? Because if the answer is no than these portrayals are here to stay. And I'd also love to see evidence these portrayals are harmful. Because until now there is even less evidence of that than there is of Jack Thompson being right.