So, I agree with pretty much everything in Anita Sarkeesian's Damsels in Distress video.

[generals3]

The outcome may be sexist but that is irrelevant.

No it isn't, that is in fact the point. Sexism is what we are complaining about. It doesn't matter whether the devs do it because they hate women or because they like money. We want them to STOP DOING IT.

At the end of the day you are sitting here telling me, as a female gamer, what I should and shouldn't say...

But it is, because it is only sexist on the surface, that's the whole point. The fact a women needs to be rescued by a man isn't sexist by nature. Because by that standard than you'd need to make every character gender neutral to ensure no gender is being discriminated against. The surface might suggests the gaming industry is sexist because the working formula is being over-used. However it isn't sexist on any other level because what motivates re-using the formula is money. The whole outcome is only sexist on the most irrelevant level. It's like yelling sexism because more men study engineering. What would be the point? And actually i'm thinking i'm even using the word sexism wrong because to think of it, how can an outcome be sexist? As if outcomes can discriminate...

And yes i'm telling what you shouldn't say (and i don't even see how the fact you're a female gamer is even relevant, i don't care about your gender at all) because i believe what you and other feminists are saying is plainly wrong on many levels. Trying to guilt an industry into doing things your way is by all means not acceptable.

 

[Something Amyss]

Good post, but I don't think you will find much support here. Generally here people get very defensive on any attacks on games. I understand why as it's hard to look past the upfront argument.

They will also get incredibly hostile when teh wimminz come up. Because we're not a sexist community but friendzonealphamalemakemeasammichrapejokesarecoolbro

I agree with the content of the original post, but a lot of those things left out are left out because they're inconvenient to the narrative of Sarkeesian as a radical feminazi/con artist/troll.

 

[Something Amyss]

90% of that video is her pointing out things everyone already knew.

Then why are so many people so quick to deny pretty much everything she said?

 

[Ghostshark]

Quick question? Why? Why is this woman getting so much attention? She made a kickstarter and a youtube series, why are we paying so much attention to her? Is she really that important? Come on.

I think she's getting so much attention because of the backlash against her viewpoints, and the 'cyber-bullying' that has ensued because of her YouTube videos. She's done a lot with movies about pointing out sexism, and moving onto videogames has only caught the ire of the gaming community.

I think her points are valid and often we don't even see the bias because we are so desensitized to it.

However, my counterpoint with her is: If someone is portrayed as a sex object, but then also shown to be a fully developed character, is that sexist? For instance, can you have a scantily clad female main character in a game but still have her be competent, have a range of emotions and responses and still be treated by other characters in the game as a serious character? Would that be inappropriate or anti-feminist?

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

snip

Feminists aren't trying to guilt anyone into anything they are merely stating facts. Any guilt devs or gamers might feel is purely on them.

You seem to be upset by the fact that we would dare suggest that there is anything wrong with the game industry and complain about it. You know what probably 90% of people are doing on the Escapist. Or did you miss the whole Mass Effect 3 thing?

The game industry isn't perfect stop pretending that it is. Ms Sarkeesian is just trying to point out what is wrong and pretty inoffensively at that.

Whether sexism is on the surface or deeply ingrained it's still wrong.

 

[Blade_125]

Good post, but I don't think you will find much support here. Generally here people get very defensive on any attacks on games. I understand why as it's hard to look past the upfront argument.

They will also get incredibly hostile when teh wimminz come up. Because we're not a sexist community but friendzonealphamalemakemeasammichrapejokesarecoolbro

I agree with the content of the original post, but a lot of those things left out are left out because they're inconvenient to the narrative of Sarkeesian as a radical feminazi/con artist/troll.

The main issue i see is that Anita is fighting the wrong fight. As I mentioned in my initial post she fights the symptoms and not the cause. Some people recognize this and get mad at her for railing against these issues that aren't the real issue. Some are just idiots who hate her attacking their favorite things, and some are just assholes who hate women.

YOu and I are not women (I am assuming) so we don't know how it is for them when coming against the problems they still face. While it is better thant he 50's it is still not equal. I do not approve of some ways that women fight for equal rights (pulling a fire alarm to stop a meeting you don't agree with is never acceptable), but I understand the frustration and the desire to fix things.

Maybe something you might want to think of the next time you feel like calling someone a radical feminazi/con artist/troll.

 

[xaszatm]

When they give the female character such armour they are saying 'This character is here as eye candy for the GUY playing the game' and thus straight out of the gate negate anything she does by objectifying her.

No, that is you hearing that. And negating anything she does? Really? So you'd negate anything women do in RL because they wear skimpy clothes? And if not, why would you assume skimpy clothes negate anything a female character does in a game?
And you also make the assumption this is only for the guy. Unless you have surveys/studies to back the fact that most female gamers don't like playing as bikini armored female characters you have no point. And this is probably the biggest problem i have with feminists; they think their opinion are shared by all women.

My point was that most feminists who voice complaints about this are gamers themselves. And then so why are they ignored when you yourself said you would complain?

At the end of the day making money doesn't legitimise sexism.

Because gamers complain about a lot and most who complain are ignored because they are just a loud minority. Just like I am when i complain about the difficulty of games.

At the end of the day it isn't sexism because the free market only cares about money which isn't gendered. The outcome may be sexist but that is irrelevant. Women are free to choose what they study just as men yet you see clear difference in ratios which is a technically sexist outcome, does that mean universities discriminate or act in a sexist manner? No.
The gaming market wants money and if the feminist dream game doesn't offer money than it won't happen, period. This has NOTHING to do with sexism, misogyny or whatever and all to do about capitalism and the free market.

I think you are missing the point of what Midnight Butterfly is saying. No, she is not negating what that person did. If a real life person managed to do heroics in bikini armour, I'm pretty sure that few people would be questioning her heroics or bravery...because she would have to be utterly insane to do such a thing. There is literally NO reason for bikini armour OTHER THAN sexual titilation. It offers nothing else. It can't protect you, it can't help you in any possible way, it probably is extremely uncomfortable to wear. Nothing justifies Bikini Armour except for sexual attraction.

The problem with things like the bikini armour arises when people like you tries to justify by saying "But, she did this awesome moves! She is extremely heroic!" Uh, heroics are great and all, but let's not pretend there is another reason for bikini armour. She would be just as heroic with full plate or even fully covered anything and would be completely practical. Nothing is taken away by giving her normal armour.

Furthermore, you second statement is still false. In fact just watch this as he can explain this a lot better than I can.

 

[xaszatm]

snip

Feminists aren't trying to guilt anyone into anything they are merely stating facts. Any guilt devs or gamers might feel is purely on them.

You seem to be upset by the fact that we would dare suggest that there is anything wrong with the game industry and complain about it. You know what probably 90% of people are doing on the Escapist. Or did you miss the whole Mass Effect 3 thing?

The game industry isn't perfect stop pretending that it is. Ms Sarkeesian is just trying to point out what is wrong and pretty inoffensively at that.

Whether sexism is on the surface or deeply ingrained it's still wrong.

I know that this first part is a bit of a derailment but what does Mass Effect 3 have to do with the current feminism debates? Or are you referring to something else?

OT: I am beginning to think that this debate will never be rational. Mainly because of the ad homenim (sp?) nature of the people against femminism in gaming. While I do think that Anita isn't the best representative for females in games, I do agree with what she has said so far as well. Furthermore, she in only showing 2 game series and the video says PART 1 so I am assuming that there is more to what she has to say.

 

[generals3]

Feminists aren't trying to guilt anyone into anything they are merely stating facts. Any guilt devs or gamers might feel is purely on them.

You seem to be upset by the fact that we would dare suggest that there is anything wrong with the game industry and complain about it. You know what probably 90% of people are doing on the Escapist. Or did you miss the whole Mass Effect 3 thing?

The game industry isn't perfect stop pretending that it is. Ms Sarkeesian is just trying to point out what is wrong and pretty inoffensively at that.

Whether sexism is on the surface or deeply ingrained it's still wrong.

As a professional complainer when it comes to games i find the assumption i'm upset because people complain to be rather funny.

And really? Sarkeesian linked this trope to Real life at the end of her video. She says that the notion of women being weaker are continuously being perpetrated by such things. If that's not trying to guilt the industry i don't know.

And you did it in the post i'm quoting right now. You made a moral judgement by saying "it's wrong". While it should have been "I don't like it". And like i said it is only on the surface as the outcome and as i added i probably misused the word "sexism" because all i wanted to say is that there are more male protagonists and interesting characters so the distribution is unequal. But just like unequal distributions in universities don't necessarily imply sexism the same goes for games (and anything else for that matter)

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

snip

Like I said, not trying to guilt people, stating facts. Any guilt is purely on the person feeling the guilt. It doesn't come from nowhere.

Pretty sure sexism is pretty widely accepted as morally wrong. Along with racism. Do you think it's right?

Like I said just because it's the outcome doesn't make it any less wrong. What's the problem with having more female protagonists and interesting characters?

 

[generals3]

snip

Like I said, not trying to guilt people, stating facts. Any guilt is purely on the person feeling the guilt. It doesn't come form nowhere.

Pretty sure sexism is pretty widely accepted as morally wrong. Along with racism. Do you think it's right?

I would like to reply with my edit: "And like i said it is only on the surface in the outcome. And as i added i probably misused the word "sexism" because all i wanted to say is that there are more male protagonists and interesting characters so the distribution is unequal. But just like unequal distributions in universities don't necessarily imply sexism the same goes for games (and anything else for that matter)"

And no you're not stating facts. Saying something is "wrong" is not stating facts. It's making a moral judgement. And since you made mostly assumptions in many of your posts i'd say you're far from "just stating facts".

 

[generals3]

I think you are missing the point of what Midnight Butterfly is saying. No, she is not negating what that person did. If a real life person managed to do heroics in bikini armour, I'm pretty sure that few people would be questioning her heroics or bravery...because she would have to be utterly insane to do such a thing. There is literally NO reason for bikini armour OTHER THAN sexual titilation. It offers nothing else. It can't protect you, it can't help you in any possible way, it probably is extremely uncomfortable to wear. Nothing justifies Bikini Armour except for sexual attraction.

She did however state word for word: "When they give the female character such armour they are saying 'This character is here as eye candy for the GUY playing the game' and thus straight out of the gate negate anything she does by objectifying her."

And the fact there is no other reason than aesthetics for bikini armor is as relevant as saying there is no other reason than aesthetics to have fancy looking male armors. Obviously the making of fancy looking armor for males is pure evidence men are being objectified as things to look at, after all why would anyone spent the efforts crafting fancy looking armor, fanciness doesn't make it more effective. See i can look for things which aren't there too. You can vilify any choice if you just twist things the right way.

The problem with things like the bikini armour arises when people like you tries to justify by saying "But, she did this awesome moves! She is extremely heroic!" Uh, heroics are great and all, but let's not pretend there is another reason for bikini armour. She would be just as heroic with full plate or even fully covered anything and would be completely practical. Nothing is taken away by giving her normal armour.

Furthermore, you second statement is still false. In fact just watch this as he can explain this a lot better than I can.

1st: I don't like jimquisition so i ain't looking at that. If you want you can make a summary of the relevant parts but i'm not gonna torture myself with one of his videos.

2nd: And a man would just be as heroic with a not so fancy/badass looking armor.

So in conclusion: these choices are simply made because they're aesthetically pleasing for the audience. Both the male and female characters are designed in a way they're aesthetically pleasing and heroic. Saying that somehow that entails women are being objectified is just trying way too hard to see things in the most negative way.

 

[The_Echo]

90% of that video is her pointing out things everyone already knew.

Then why are so many people so quick to deny pretty much everything she said?

It might have something to do with her relating those things as though they're current problems, rather than issues from the industry's infancy.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

90% of that video is her pointing out things everyone already knew.

Then why are so many people so quick to deny pretty much everything she said?

It might have something to do with her relating those things as though they're current problems, rather than issues from the industry's infancy.

Hence it being part one of this topic?...:/

 

[RedDeadFred]

Here's the harsh reality. The majority of people who play video games are men. Most video games are probably designed with the target audience as mostly male. Sadly, a lot of men wouldn't be interested in playing games that don't feature an "hot" woman or feature you playing the role of a strong female character who isn't scantly clad.

People need to stop pointing their fingers at video games and turn them towards society. Attacking people's enjoyment is just going to cause revolt. Instead, try to educate them instead of making videos pointing from game to game saying "that's sexist."

Yes, we know but instead of pointing fingers, why not come up with some solutions?

Also, did this really need a thread? Why not just say your very long "I agree" post in one of the many other threads devoted to this woman. Is it because you knew that this is a touchy topic and would get tons of responses? Then again, I replied so I'm not exactly helping.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

snip

So you think my moral judgement is wrong? You think sexism is something that should be supported in the games industry?

And I was referring to Anita as stating facts. She's not trying to make anyone feel guilty.

Backpedaling out of saying it's sexist at the last minute doesn't really change anything. Sorry.

A for your other comment They are made in a way they are aesthetically pleasing FOR A MALE AUDIENCE. That disregards and treats the female gamer with contempt.

You don't see a problem because it doesn't affect you.

 

[xaszatm]

I think you are missing the point of what Midnight Butterfly is saying. No, she is not negating what that person did. If a real life person managed to do heroics in bikini armour, I'm pretty sure that few people would be questioning her heroics or bravery...because she would have to be utterly insane to do such a thing. There is literally NO reason for bikini armour OTHER THAN sexual titilation. It offers nothing else. It can't protect you, it can't help you in any possible way, it probably is extremely uncomfortable to wear. Nothing justifies Bikini Armour except for sexual attraction.

She did however state word for word: "When they give the female character such armour they are saying 'This character is here as eye candy for the GUY playing the game' and thus straight out of the gate negate anything she does by objectifying her."

And the fact there is no other reason than aesthetics for bikini armor is as relevant as saying there is no other reason than aesthetics to have fancy looking male armors. Obviously the making of fancy looking armor for males is pure evidence men are being objectified as things to look at, after all why would anyone spent the efforts crafting fancy looking armor, fanciness doesn't make it more effective. See i can look for things which aren't there too. You can vilify any choice if you just twist things the right way.

The problem with things like the bikini armour arises when people like you tries to justify by saying "But, she did this awesome moves! She is extremely heroic!" Uh, heroics are great and all, but let's not pretend there is another reason for bikini armour. She would be just as heroic with full plate or even fully covered anything and would be completely practical. Nothing is taken away by giving her normal armour.

Furthermore, you second statement is still false. In fact just watch this as he can explain this a lot better than I can.

1st: I don't like jimquisition so i ain't looking at that. If you want you can make a summary of the relevant parts but i'm not gonna torture myself with one of his videos.

2nd: And a man would just be as heroic with a not so fancy/badass looking armor.

So in conclusion: these choices are simply made because they're aesthetically pleasing for the audience. Both the male and female characters are designed in a way they're aesthetically pleasing and heroic. Saying that somehow that entails women are being objectified is just trying way too hard to see things in the most negative way.

Alright, fine, ignoring what MoonlightButterfly is saying, you still don't see the problem with the bikini armour? At all? Like, you see absolutely not a single thing wrong with it? Fancy armour might not have any use other than aesthetics, BUT IT"S IS STILL FULL ARMOUR! IT DOES STILL HAVE A PRACTICAL USE! Those fancy armours still provides protection against attacks. Female bikini armour on the other hand doesn't even have that. It is completely impractical and serves no other purpose than aestetic. And no, don't give me "what if she dodges?" Then she can wear leather armour, or something that covers the full body. She can still look sexy without looking stupid.

Furthermore, the fancy armour is a poor comparison, a much better comparison would be the speedo chain male most male characters wear. What's that? They don't exist? Why? BECAUSE IT LOOKS STUPID AND IS IMPRACTICAL! Why can't this line of thought be used for the bikini mail?

Also, the jimquisition video in question is stating that publishers are now actively pushing female game characters into the background. They say females don't sell video games, so the require only the most generic advertisements, covers, and previews to hide this fact. Said games get overlooked for looking to bland, thereby turning this into a self-fulfiling prophecy.

 

[b.w.irenicus]

I think you, generals3 and Moonlight Butterfly, are just missing each others point in this debate.
generals3 state, as far as I understood, that there is no underlying sexism in how the industry handles things, as they are simply pandering to their target audience, and their target audience demands tough guys and hot chicks. Wanting to change that would actually mean to abolish the free market, because, well, it's free and not bound to give equal represantation. Developers have to sell their product and do that by concentrating on their target audience. Thats how the free market works, be it video games, TV or cars or sports or whatever. That doesn't make Gears of War for example more sexist than Sex & the City. The outcome of this however, as the target audience is mainly male, is, that there is a vast majority of male leads and underdeveloped, eye-candy female characters. And that is what generals3 called sexist and problematic.
MoonightButterfly stated, that she didn't believe, that the target audience really wants only to have tough guys and hot chicks, but that everybody is able to identify with characters even of the opposite sex.

And that's basically it: Does the target audience really only want one sided eye-candy girls in their games or not. I dont have studies or surveys, so I wouldn't know. I do however know, that I would love to have more developed and bad ass female leads.

Of course it is possible that now I completly missed your points. ^^

 

[Wuvlycuddles]

Yeah, she is absolutely correct but she is also absolutely unnecessary. I'd like to think the industry is changing for the better already, at least games that subvert and/or avoid the typically sexist traditional tropes appear to be more common and more popular, in fact I seem to remember God of War catching some shit for being misogynistic recently.

But at no point during the video did she advise us to be aware of sexism in games and perhaps vote with our wallets, she pointed to a thing and told us its a thing and provided no real substance, no real context and no real advice. People paid $160,000 for that video and I don't think it was worth it.

 

[generals3]

snip

So you think my moral judgement is wrong? You think sexism is something that should be supported in the games industry?

And I was referring to Anita as stating facts. She's not trying to make anyone feel guilty.

Backpedaling out of saying it's sexist at the last minute doesn't really change anything. Sorry.

A for your other comment They are made in a way they are aesthetically pleasing FOR A MALE AUDIENCE. That disregards and treats the female gamer with contempt.

You don't see a problem because it doesn't affect you.

I'm not backpedalling, i simply wrongly expressed myself. If you look at my post in which i used the word "sexism" wrongly and look at my analogy it is crystal clear what I meant. I merely corrected and clarified myself.

Secondly, i'm not sayin sexism isn't wrong (actually it depends when and how as can be understood from my last paragraph), i'm saying that assertion is wrong. So you are making a moral judgement based on an assertion. That's far from "stating facts".

And I would like you to re-see the video of anita and mainly look at the last minutes. Those were minutes filled with assertions and judgements. Saying these games reinforce bad atittudes in RL is an assertion and is an attempt at judging said games. There are no facts whatsoever to be found in the last minutes. And since that's the most despicable part in her video it's extremely relevant.

And you know it gets very confusing when you're constantly shifting layers when pointing out sexism. The fact they're aesthetically pleasing for a male audience is actually not entirely correct: straight males would be more correct (and even than i could go start linking articles and studies which would point out that not to be entirely correct, but i'll spare you that for the moment). So it's not even solely gender based targeting. And just to be 100% clear, we're analyzing the marketing strategy here, not the content of the game. How is that even relevant to anything? Marketing ALWAYS discriminates. A business which targets a product or service at everyone is going to fail. Not even Coke is targeted at everyone. And do you know why? Because when you target everyone your true costumers won't be targeted enough and you'll be targeting people who wouldn't buy your product/service anyway. Are you also on a big crusade against luxury companies because they target rich people and thus treat poor people with contempt? Do you realize how ludicrous that is?