Serious question for feminist critique of video games

[Vegosiux]

Just because they're cowards does not make it any less of harassment. While you may not think you're being an apologist, I feel that this type of rhetoric accepts this kind of behavior rather than condemn it.

Can't control how you feel, but that's not correct. But at this point we'd be just arguing semantics, seeing as we both think those people are pricks and dickheads who need to get a reality check, even if for slightly different reasons.

 

[TekMoney]

She already gets death and rape threats, may as well piss off as many people as possible.

"Lol ***** should die/get raped" isn't a death threat. Most of those "threats" are just immature people acting tough on the internet, without an actual serious intent to cause harm to her sexual integrity or person. Yes I realize a few nutcases might be serious about it, but I dare say an overwhelming majority of them are just "tough guys" that would faint the moment they wanted to say hello to a woman, much less touch her.

Do not think for a moment that I'm being an apologist here, it's still behavior that should not be tolerated, but what I want to do with those people is tell them to go to their room or I'll be telling their mother; not press criminal charges >.>

You are kind of suggesting it's not that big of a deal. Which is an awful lot like being an apologist.

 

[Erttheking]

You know, my friend said this to me once. "I actually think I'm a better critic than a story teller". Just because you can effectively dissect a story and point out what doesn't work, doesn't mean you're good at coming up with original ideas on your own. Heck, I'm the exact opposite of him. I think I'm really good at coming up with creative ideas, but when it comes down to being really critical I'm nowhere near as throughout or analytical as him. I'm sorry, the "Then YOU do something about it" argument always just seemed like a cop out argument.

You don't like the way the country is being run? Well you run for president.

It just feels like that.

 

[NortherWolf]

Just because they're cowards does not make it any less of harassment. While you may not think you're being an apologist, I feel that this type of rhetoric accepts this kind of behavior rather than condemn it.

Can't control how you feel, but that's not correct. But at this point we'd be just arguing semantics, seeing as we both think those people are pricks and dickheads who need to get a reality check, even if for slightly different reasons.

"People are overreacting to threats, it's no big deal. Kids will be kids."
"No no, I'm not an apologist *backpedals like a baws*"

Uh huh. Pray tell, what are you then? Because it sounds an awful lot like you're excusing shit aimed at certain parts of the hobby that most likely differ from you.

 

[WenisPagon]

Problem is, I HATE radical feminism!

Pussy Riot are radical feminists. Sarkisian adapts academic feminist theory and applies it to media.

In a very not-academic way (lax research methods, not crediting her sources, making some stretchy leaps of logic...). She's not an academic, or rather she doesn't act it.

But you're right on that she's not a "radical feminist"[footnote]Or a tubular one for that matter.[/footnote], or a "femnazi", from a perspective line, Sarkeesian is closer to me than Dworkin for example. She just really, really needs to get her shit together and apply some proper methodology and stop acting in that "X therefore I'm right" way.

Actually that's not entirely fair to her, her second TvW video was better than the first, and the third one was better than the second, so she does seem to at least consider criticism, even if she doesn't seem to like to hear it. Now if only she'd actually do something other than sit on those 160k she got off kickstarter.

The reason that Anita began her series of videos was to promote a discussion of aspects of her favorite hobby that are problematic from a feminist perspective. It was never meant to be a research paper.

There is now actual discourse on this subject happening in gameen jurnalezem, in part because she was ruthlessly harassed for having an opinion. People were rattled enough that they tried to censor her. You don't think that says something about the value of the discussion she was instrumental in starting?

 

[Vegosiux]

"People are overreacting to threats, it's no big deal. Kids will be kids."
"No no, I'm not an apologist *backpedals like a baws*"

Marvelous. Might you please point at where I said that?

Uh huh. Pray tell, what are you then?

Someone who's very, very annoyed about that strawman.

Because it sounds an awful lot like you're excusing shit aimed at certain parts of the hobby that most likely differ from you.

Really. I suppose that's why I made it a point to explicitly state that it's behavior that shouldn't be tolerated and that they're douchebags. Really, where did that become the definiton of "excusing shit"? I didn't get the memo.

You are kind of suggesting it's not that big of a deal. Which is an awful lot like being an apologist.

I'm kind of not. I would also be kind of happy if you would kind of cease and desist this kind of strawmanning me and address what I said. Namely, that it's untolerable behavior and that they're dickheads for engaging in it.

 

[Vegosiux]

There is now actual discourse on this subject happening in gameen jurnalezem, in part because she was ruthlessly harassed for having an opinion. People were rattled enough that they tried to censor her. You don't think that says something about the value of the discussion she was instrumental in starting?

No, I do not. The same way I don't credit a bolt of lightning for having invented the Tesla coil.

 

[TekMoney]

"People are overreacting to threats, it's no big deal. Kids will be kids."
"No no, I'm not an apologist *backpedals like a baws*"

Marvelous. Might you please point at where I said that?

Uh huh. Pray tell, what are you then?

Someone who's very, very annoyed about that strawman.

Because it sounds an awful lot like you're excusing shit aimed at certain parts of the hobby that most likely differ from you.

Really. I suppose that's why I made it a point to explicitly state that it's behavior that shouldn't be tolerated and that they're douchebags. Really, where did that become the definiton of "excusing shit"? I didn't get the memo.

You are kind of suggesting it's not that big of a deal. Which is an awful lot like being an apologist.

I'm kind of not. I would also be kind of happy if you would kind of cease and desist this kind of strawmanning me and address what I said. Namely, that it's untolerable behavior and that they're dickheads for engaging in it.

You know, when three different people call you out for the same thing. Maybe you should consider that it's not "strawmanning" and you may have worded something badly.

 

[JediMB]

All video game critics should just stop writing/talking about games, and instead become developers.

Obviously.

Because anyone can just spontaneously switch fields, regardless of what it is they're good at.

 

[AwesomeHatMan]

Of course she wouldn't be able to fund a triple A release by herself and does not have the skills necessarily to develop a game herself but as stated before indie games have been made with a lower budget. Instead of funding her own series maybe she would have been better off forming a partnership with an indie game developer where she could act as a producer/editor for a new game with a strong female lead. That way she gets the game she wants, an indie developer with similar views gets funding to make a game and if the indie game is successful it will be taken as an example for future games in the industry. What's more is if it was a good game many haters may even start playing an equality-friendly game instead of being enraged because someone is complaining about the games they like without providing much solution. In fact this would be a much better way of converting those haters to the cause.

 

[Rebel_Raven]

Same reason you, OP, don't have a large following on youtube criticizing the game industry, I'd wager? You don't like how she does it, so do it yourself? >.>

"Make your own (insert something)" is:
A cop out argument
Hypocratical
Ignorant as all get out.

Seriously.

It's generally used as a "STFU!!" grade conversation ender.

Unless you're taking your own advice, and I wager a lot simply aren't, it reeks of hypocracy.

Ignorant coz the person spouting out the nonsense generally has no idea what it takes to make a game, nor the target's ability to make one, or much of anything but having a distinct desire to try and win the debate with "make your own!"

It's really rare that it doesn't fall into these categories and frankly, I'd be pleased if people realized this and generally carelessly stopped using it unless they're prepared to help somehow. Info, links, money, talent. Just saying it doesn't help anything.

 

[EtherealBeaver]

I hope, with that attitude, you're running for political office. Or you can't complain about pretty much anything.

I actively vote and I dont have the assets to set aside time to run for office if I had the possibility. If I did have, I´d most definatly run for office because there are things I´d love to change. The main key word here is "possibility" though.I recognize many people dont have the chance to change what they dont like, but people like her do have both the means, contacts and money to make the games she apparantly would wish existed. There is no one in her way of creating said games and distributing them in any way she would like. Her name alone is worth the world in an ad campaign and judging by her kickstarter, she could easily get quite a bit of sales.

The games industry is big. Really, really big. You aren't going to make much
of a change if you decide to enter it.

Agreed but that doesnt mean nobody without a publisher cant make a living from it - or a pretty decent one at that. Binding of Isaac, spelunky and minecraft are very good examples of this. I know they are exceptions to the rule but they were also made by people who were no-bodys before that and at anita has her name to back up a project. She doent even have to be the one making the game because with the money from the kickstarter she should easily have the money to hire a small team of devs (which is still significantly larger than spelunky, boi and minecraft had) and as long as she approves what they make, no dev experience is needed. If the world truly needs what she is preaching, she should be sitting on a gold mine.

Im talking from the supply and demand point of view here naturally but she said that many women dont play because they feel alienated by the male dominated games. If she were to make a game with her stamp of approval, she could circumvent that dogma, get women into gaming, show the publishers how much money they are missing and change the face of women i gaming. That would be taking agency. You cant appeal to business with morals but you sure as hell can appeal to them with money and interest.

As for why no one does, have you heard what happened when they were trying to make Remember Me? Or the whole Elizabeth Bioshock Infinite cover art issue. The games industry is literally barring strong competent female leads from entering. People are doing, there's plenty of games that do have strong female characters, it's just miniscule compared to the number of men. It doesn't help that the industry tries to stamp them out.

Again a strong argument for her publishing her own games and showing those publishers how much money they are missing out on if her sales break the ceiling.

"If you don't like 'CTRL ALT DEL', why don't you make your own webcomic!!!? You can't write or draw? Too bad, that's the only option!"
"If you don't like 'Call of Duty', why don't you make your own AAA Game!?!?! You don't have millions of dollars and a team of 100 to create a AAA game? Too bad, that's the only option!"
"If you don't like 'Sexy Co-Eds 5', why don't you make your own po....actually, never mind on that one, that's not a bad idea..."

There are plenty of AAA games on the market. One more does not make others obsolete. Besides, a game does not need to be AAA to be influential. Just look at my above examples. Also, Im pretty sure all those people who read CTRLALTDEL and decided to make their own comics, never to read CTRLALTDEL again and be happy about that are rather content that they can just ignore what they dont like of the webcomics and make their own brand to correct what they think is wrong in that particular part of the economy/society

Have you considered that maybe the viewpoints of women in the industry are already being marginalized? There are all sorts of testimonials by women of the industry that it's an old boy's club.

It's all getting better, of course, but to claim there isn't still a problem there is delusion on par with believing racism no longer exists.

I am not claiming there is no problem. What I am claiming is that you cant say it is a problem that a group of people have no agency and need another group to fix their problem - and then throw away your agency even though you have to means to act upon it and ask that very same group to fix your problems for you. If she is truly so adamant in her views, I see no reason why other people/companies should take the risk of proving her right - and I see no reason why she should not just cash in on her convictions if they are indeed her convictions.

So let me counter with my own question: Why should she have to be the one to do this? Why can't, of all the thousands of games in development around the world, just a few teams volunteer to work her ideas into the games they're working on already?

A valid point, to which I would reply that if a person brings up something they find wrong in the world and want it to change while others do not show the same intent - then all that person can do is to change it herself. She does not need design or coding experience. Her kickstarter alone left her a salary worth a few years worth of standard wage even here in scandinavia where we have some of the highest average and minimum wages in the world. She could easily pay for a small team for half a year with the kickstarter funds alone, not counting her income as a blogger/lecturer (which is bound to be rather higher than your standard salary, seeing as she is so well known).

Other personalities bringing this sort of question to the masses without the means she has, I would not have set to the same standards because they would not have had the same possibilities as she obviously has (poking the bear here would probably be to call attention to her privilige?)

They act as hyper-sexualized objects, usually little more than rewards, for the player - a predominantly male demographic. Feminism seeks equality and egalitarianism, and while men definitely are sexualized in video games - it's also to appeal to male fantasies.

If feminists sought egalitarianism they would call themselves egalitarianists. Dubbing your entire movement after a single gender does not excatly indicate that you wish the best for both genders.
That said aside, what about the hordes of [male] enemies that the agent (player) kills in many games? If games truly indicated and taught people who play them that women are objects because that is how they are supposedly portrayed in games, do not games also teach the player that men are just something in your way - something to kill and get on with it?

Or to follow the simcity analogy, if video games really incited behaviour in people playing them, why werent people running around taking up urban planning when simcity became a thing?

Plenty of studios take a less sexualized approach. While I can't say for certain that they'd label themselves Feminists, look at Gaben and Valve. Alyx is attractive, yes, but realistically proportioned. She takes an active role in the plot, doesn't require escorting, and while there is a budding romance she displays genuine humanity and emotion. She's not a sex toy that happens to be in the game. She's a part of the game.

Women arent the only objects in games you know. The number of games with realistically portrayed men (once again not counting valve) which portray men in a realistic manner is also rather slim since most are super human being with abs like God and supernatural abilities. I am not saying there is not a bias against women in video games but I am saying that it is caused by supply and demand more than bigotry from the publishers - if nothing else then because publishers are machines who work for optimised profit rather than morale or ethics.

There obviously is a market for it but dont let confirmation bias let you miss the games which actually portray characters in a realistic fashion because you are too busy looking for the ones who dont.

The same can be said for similar characters in Mass Effect (although to a lesser extent) and it can go all the way back to Baldur's Gate II with Jaheira - a strong female character who is attractive, but realistically proportioned and with a complex backstory that leads to even more complex interactions. She's not a piece of tail or just something pretty to look at. She's completely optional, too.

Agreed. Anti-feminism isnt as pervasive as some people, like Jim Sterling for instance, make it out to me.

Placeholder for more answers

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

The "if you don't like it go do it yourself" argument is pretty lame. It's the Schneider thing all over again - a critic says his movie sucks ass, Schneider says he can't say shit because he doesn't have a Pulitzer prize and Ebert jumps in: "As chance would have it, I have won the Pulitzer Prize, and so I am qualified. Speaking in my official capacity as a Pulitzer Prize winner, Mr. Schneider, your movie sucks." But the point isn't that you need to meet a certain requirement to pass judgment on a movie (or a book, or a game, or whatever) but that it doesn't make any difference if you do.

 

[Something Amyss]

I have been wondering the last few years why feminists like Sarkeesian complain that much about womens roles in video games. If she is so much against it and know so many other people are also against the way women are portrayed in video games, why doesnt she just become a video game designer herself and rake in the money that other developers apparantly arent interested in?

Tell you what. Let's see you design a successful game before we expect Anita to. Lead by example, man!

Didnt she want agency taken from men and given to women?

You're not serious, are you? That's a strawman, and a fairly typical attempt to turn this into an "X vs Y" argument.

She got more money from her kickstarter than many indie devs have to spend on their games she she definatly has the means even if she cant code.

You do realise that money is still earmarked, right? Just because you go beyond the goals of a Kickstarter doesn't mean you get to spend the rest as you see fit. Are you seriously asking her to commit fraud

If she truly belives what she says, she must be convinced that people will buy any product with women depicted like she thinks they should be and therefore, she should be looking at millions of game sales.

Believing women are poorly portrayed in media means she must believe people will snap up anything with a strong female protagonist? That logic doesn't follow.

So let me counter with my own question: Why should she have to be the one to do this? Why can't, of all the thousands of games in development around the world, just a few teams volunteer to work her ideas into the games they're working on already?

I wonder how much of this comes down to the refusal of big companies to even consider female protagonists. Not to mention, if you can't even put a female character on the cover, what chance are we expected to have with a lead. And when focus groups also exclude women....

I mean, it's sort of like "why are we even having this discussion?" at this point.

Would you have thought that a single person, a girl named Rosa Parks would have been able to bring about the changes she did just by being a ***** [footnote]I'm speaking entirely within the context of the social order at the time here. Some people could call Anita a ***** too for not shutting up about girls in games[/footnote] and not giving up her seat?

Of course, things had already been changing at that point. There had been organised protests by then. Parks may have made a nice figurehead, but it's probably dishonest to say she brought about change.

At the same time, you already drew comparison between Anita and Parks, and the point is that Anita wouldn't have to do anything other than what she's doing to be considered the analogue. Think about it.

I hope, with that attitude, you're running for political office. Or you can't complain about pretty much anything.

THANK. YOU.

I'm yet to meet the "why don't you do it yourself" advocate who doesn't complain about something they don't themselves otherwise contribute to. The question then becomes "why do you ask (X) to put their money where their mouth is if you won't do it yourself?"

But usually, that's different because....Ponies.

Problem is, I HATE radical feminism!

On what planet is this radical?

 

[EtherealBeaver]

Same reason you, OP, don't have a large following on youtube criticizing the game industry, I'd wager? You don't like how she does it, so do it yourself? >.>

"Make your own (insert something)" is:
A cop out argument
Hypocratical
Ignorant as all get out.

Seriously.

It's generally used as a "STFU!!" grade conversation ender.

Unless you're taking your own advice, and I wager a lot simply aren't, it reeks of hypocracy.

Ignorant coz the person spouting out the nonsense generally has no idea what it takes to make a game, nor the target's ability to make one, or much of anything but having a distinct desire to try and win the debate with "make your own!"

It's really rare that it doesn't fall into these categories and frankly, I'd be pleased if people realized this and generally carelessly stopped using it unless they're prepared to help somehow. Info, links, money, talent. Just saying it doesn't help anything.

I am not interested in making youtube videos and I am quite capable of finding what I like there and ignoring what I dont. What I would prefer though is that you dont call me hypocritical or ignorant - I have made my case, supported it with arguments, none of which are fallacies to the best of my conviction, and I would really prefer if we could keep this a civil discussion with reasonable points. I dont demean the other party but rather I inquire to the specific points of the arguments presented. I would appreciate if you kept the name calling to yourself.

 

[EtherealBeaver]

Tell you what. Let's see you design a successful game before we expect Anita to. Lead by example, man!

I have no idea why you added that last line and I find it sexist. I never said I disagreed with her based on her gender - I said I disagreed with her based on her points and her inability to follow her own logic. That said, I have been helping in the development of dota 1 and the transition to dota 2 as well as made my own mod for Warcraft 3TFT with about 100k downloads . if that qualifies, I dont know and I honestly dont care. I just thought I´d throw it in there because it seems like you were rather obsessed about that detail.

I do though feel that it is a bit anti-male to assume that I am a male just because I dont agree with feminism. It seems rather bias to assume someone belongs to a specific group just because they have a specific oppinion, dont you think? If it was the other way around, there would be a ton of replies calling me a bigot - even though I still havent revealed my gender - and that duality is part of the very core of the underlying problem I think. But never mind that since it was slightly off topic.

You do realise that money is still earmarked, right? Just because you go beyond the goals of a Kickstarter doesn't mean you get to spend the rest as you see fit. Are you seriously asking her to commit fraud

You never really read the kickstarter terms of service did you?

"Project Creators are required to fulfill all rewards of their successful fundraising campaigns or refund any Backer whose reward they do not or cannot fulfill."

"Project Creators agree to make a good faith attempt to fulfill each reward by its Estimated Delivery Date."

They say nothing about earmarking any funds what so ever to any project of any sort. They are responsible for the service they provide. Not anything more or anything less. It is not a shop - it is a fundraising platform and the fact is that not every project makes it. Customers are entitles to their reward if any is given by the project creator but what it costs to make is irrelevant and not a dime is earmarked to anything. You really should go read them at http://www.kickstarter.com/terms-of-use before you back a kickstarter

 

[infinity_turtles]

I think applying this line of thought to Sarkessian isn't a good idea. What I will say though is that for all the outspoken and passionate people who care about the representation of women in games, the fact that no-one has started up a company or pulled an Avellone during a time when Kickstarter has made that less risky than ever is incredibly sad. The fact is there are people passionate about videogames that have made huge risks to do make the sorts of games they want and to add the sort of variety they want in the medium, and for all the talk of publishers and boys' club mentality, branching out on your own or with a few like-minded devs is an option and as said less risky than ever. If there are people passionate enough to take these risks over adventure games and rpgs, then there really should be some people willing to take the risk over female representation in games.

 

[Rebel_Raven]

Same reason you, OP, don't have a large following on youtube criticizing the game industry, I'd wager? You don't like how she does it, so do it yourself? >.>

"Make your own (insert something)" is:
A cop out argument
Hypocratical
Ignorant as all get out.

Seriously.

It's generally used as a "STFU!!" grade conversation ender.

Unless you're taking your own advice, and I wager a lot simply aren't, it reeks of hypocracy.

Ignorant coz the person spouting out the nonsense generally has no idea what it takes to make a game, nor the target's ability to make one, or much of anything but having a distinct desire to try and win the debate with "make your own!"

It's really rare that it doesn't fall into these categories and frankly, I'd be pleased if people realized this and generally carelessly stopped using it unless they're prepared to help somehow. Info, links, money, talent. Just saying it doesn't help anything.

I am not interested in making youtube videos and I am quite capable of finding what I like there and ignoring what I dont. What I would prefer though is that you dont call me hypocritical or ignorant - I have made my case, supported it with arguments, none of which are fallacies to the best of my conviction, and I would really prefer if we could keep this a civil discussion with reasonable points. I dont demean the other party but rather I inquire to the specific points of the arguments presented. I would appreciate if you kept the name calling to yourself.

I'm sorry, but you don't like my argument? Make your own, then!

You're not interested in doing her job, yet you're fine criticizing it? Sounds exactly like your idea that she should make her own games, doesn't it?

Hence why the "make your own" is a flawed rebuttal. It can be attached to anything a person doesn't like, for one.
It's all pretty empty without some support. Maybe these "feminist critics" thought about it? Maybe it just wasn't realistic? How would yo uknow one way or the other?

I hold firm to my arguments about it being laced with hypocracy, ignorance, and is just a cop out. It's not on me to change that. It's on the person throwing out the suggestion to back it up.

Honestly, I wasn't calling you anything. I was speaking in general after the first paragraph. Sorry if it wasn't clear. I was merely explaining why it's a poor suggestion. Blunt, and lacking in tact, sure, but how else would one explain those 3 major flaws in the suggestion?

More reasons the whole concept of "make your own game" is flawed? 1 game's not very likely to change the industry's views towards female protagonists for one. If it did, it deserves an award and to outsell GTA V.

It'll take several entries at best, and these games would have to overcome multiple massive hurdles.
1: being produced.
2: being marketed/known about.
3: being good enough to be talked about. Or bad enough, though the latter's not a good goal to shoot for.
3a: the graphics need to be good enough to be noticed.
3b: the character needs to be done well enough that people will overcome biases against her. That means writing, and design.
That's just the rough basics.

Then there's money to create such a game. Lets see... lets try someone relatively famous, hm? http://www.engadget.com/2013/07/03/double-fine-kickstarter-debacle/

A small kickstarter pot's not going to accomplish your suggestion, I'd say.

Sure, other games make it, but the splash necessary to be made is, IMO, pretty far and away anything a true Indie could do. For every minecraft, there's thousands of failures.

Considering her star power attached to her name, and the bitterness a lot of people have against her, I'd say the game's guarenteed to fail. Then again there's a lot of factors that cause a game to fail.
Mirror's Edge 2 is supposed to have Anita on board. Lets see then:
1: People hate anita. Strike 1.
2: It's exclusive to a system many hate, the Xbone. strike 2
3: It's likely to be pretty nicheas the first one. Strike 3.
That's ignoring the fact we know so very little about the game.

The suggestion rubs me the wrong way, and looking through this thread, I'm not alone, though they disagreed more politely/tactfully.