The Big Picture: Tropes vs. MovieBob

[jmarquiso]

Yours is a very good post that will likely be ignored in favour of more of what this has devolved into. I'd say it was a shame, but I'm actually quite enjoying the mess. One of my favourite recurring line is "Why are you only talking about Sarkeesian? There are other examples..." That might be true, but this thread has never been about any of 'em.

Now touch gloves and come out swinging.

It is a very good post and I do hope it gets some response. I made an attempt, but for once Percy was right, and it is late where I am.

G'night.

 

[TAdamson]

Aha! But you claim misandry as if it is equal to misogyny!

That is sexist.

Why?

Because my dear boy!

Are you subjected to the wandering eyes that pass up your legs to the curvature of your buttocks? As if they would run their hands up your inner thigh just to touch the skin between your crevice and your private parts, then to get a good hard grope?


Does your employer ever discriminate against you because you are of the weaker sex?

Does the government ever claim that they have the right to deny you the ability to control your own biology?

Does religion ever insist that you be subordinate to men?

Does circumcision mean anything to you apart from perhaps a decrease in sensation?

But I guess you must be right. Misandry is indeed equal in quantity and magnitude to misogyny in our society.

It is so good to have you to breakfast Percy.

 

[TAdamson]

Besides, time and money had absolutely nothing to do with her Bayonetta blunder.

My dear Percy while it is nice to have you to breakfast how does her opinion on Bayonetta affect you in any way?

I thought her opinion about Bayonetta was in regards to Tokyo subways and their advertising of the aformentioned video game.

Regardless, I think a feminist is well within her rights to complain about Bayonetta.

Not that I agree. I do love a good wench clothed only in a bikini made of her own hair. Hmm.

That doesn't excuse the behaviour. Either way, she chose 4chan to supposedly spam her kickstarter. That in by itself should raise a couple of flags.

I think you may have this a bit back-to-front boy. While she may have spammed 4-chan she made her target well before any controversy. Indeed she made $24,000 before the animalistic hoard descended upon her (Figuratively I mean.)

If the sexist comments of a few enabled her to leverage another $125,000, well what the bleeding hell did they expect? Sexist attacks on a feminist web-saavy blogger kickstarter? Gold!

She made a video analyzing a game that she had never played and left it up on her channel. Then, after she made her Kickstarter and people pointed out that she is in no way qualified to analyze video games because she was either lazy or purposefully disingenuous she took down said videos in hopes that the bad publicity wouldn't affect her fundraiser. This has nothing to do with disagreeing with what she said. Objectively speaking, she is literally not qualified, on the basis of her previous videos, to analyse video games in any way, shape or form.

I'm sorry? A person can be not qualified to have an opinion on a videogame? That is breathtakingly enlightening Percy.

It's been wonderful having you to breakfast.

It is said, Percy, that civilised man seeks out good and intelligent company, so that, through learned discourse, he may rise above the savage and closer to God.

 

[el_kabong]

Wait! There's an opening for Kratos? Maybe my degree in Murderonomy will finally pay off.

OT: I personally have no problems with the whole kick-starter thing. It seems that the videos will be nothing more interesting than I can find for free elsewhere in the webspace. Not saying that her videos will be bad...but it would have to be pretty earth-shaking to beat free sources of similar information.

Personally, I like games with exaggerated models (see also Warhammer 40k, where everything is made of grimdark). Not necessarily because I get some sort of sexual satisfaction out of it(no matter how far graphics go, they can't get animated people to appear sexy to me). I like exaggerated models because it helps separate game from reality. Although there are large sections of the gamer community that like realism, I usually find myself either bored or frustrated by realism in games. When I want reality, I go outside and interact with real people. When I want games, I want to be immersed in a world that plays by its own rules, not necessarily those of our current society.

On the other hand, games that reinforce negative stereotypes are ones I don't tend to play either. Why? Because I get enough of that stuff in reality, too. Like it or not, a lot of these tropes exist because they work directly in correlation with what we are being programmed with everyday. They play on characters we've seen from other places to immediately give the viewer a sense of what that person's about without having to expend the writing/design effort in creating a meaningful character. A game with good writers will tend to have good female characters, main protagonist or not.

I guess the summation of my point is that I believe that this is an issue to be addressed, but I think the battle is better fought by depriving those who perpetuate the stereotypes of my hard earned cash (in other words, not buying shitty games). I'm not entirely sure that giving money to someone with the same viewpoint to produce a document that will probably only catch the attention of the people who gave money to it and/or the people who flame it will change anything in the long run. If this discussion thread is any indication, it simply serves to entrench people in their current viewpoints.

 

[TAdamson]

Personally, however, I like to start the day with a total dickhead to remind me I'm best.

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

If you don't know that "winning" is more important than making any kind of sense, then you clearly haven't been on these forums long. This place should come with warnings every 20 minutes like on Nintendo wii, reminding you to take breaks so that you can keep your sanity intact.

Yours is a very good post that will likely be ignored in favour of more of what this has devolved into. I'd say it was a shame, but I'm actually quite enjoying the mess. One of my favourite recurring line is "Why are you only talking about Sarkeesian? There are other examples..." That might be true, but this thread has never been about any of 'em.

Now touch gloves and come out swinging.

Ohh I've been here a while just haven't been active in the forums for a long time. Last time I was here I was quite active in the religion and politics section of the forum.

But I would just like to say a personal thank you for your comment and I will admit it is sometimes just fun to sit back and watch the mess occur.

If there is anything to learn when conversations like this fall apart I feel that most of the time it is people just making the assumption to the extreme. As in when people make a forum post due to the lack of verbal tone of face to face conversation it is easier to objectify the person they are talking to as if they were some opponent or antagonist. Chances are however that they are just responding in kind and probably having mixed feelings on the issue and their dissent or praise isn't 100% but more like 60%.

Sure it may take more time to make the post but hey, rather have that then someone make an assumption that I was some "enemy".

People do always seem to assume the worst of eachother, and then assign those people extra values so it's easier to attack them... Before you know it you're battling robo-Hitler on a message board(at least inside your own head). It would probably be embarassing for some of these people to meet IRL and learn that alot of the assumptions made simply aren't true.

I think Percy is looking fairly dejected at this point. That's not me awarding his detractors any kind of victory, it only really serves as a testiment to how you can wear a person down by outnumbering them and bombarding them.

I am realising I am talking about this like it's a spectator-sport. We're heading into over-time here, it's a race to the finish!...because that's a good place to end.

 

[Darkmantle]

I played devils advocate by basically responding with "well she should just go make a game then, because devs could say the same thing to her (go make a game with "good female representation yourself, instead of telling me what to do), if we accept that as a valid argument".

I wasn't so much making an argument as negating another. I don't think the devs or other people should use that argument, but I am also saying she (and her defenders) can't use that argument either.

make a bit more sense?

"make a bit more sense?"

The argument appeared to be that she should make a game.

I can see how this argument could be whimsical but that still boils down to: "Ha if you're so smart why don't you make a game that isn't sexist?"

Anita Sarkeesian has no ability to make a game. Her expertise is in sociology so whether you agree with her view or not:

She's not a programmer, she's not a game designer.

But that does not disqualify her from being game reviewer nor commentator.

There are many commentators in the industry and in other mediums that have no technical expertise in the medium that that discuss. The fact that they have experienced the medium is enough.

The fact that she has a Postgraduate degree in Social Thought should give her a unique perspective on the subject and gamers should be honoured to have someone of that calibre display an academic interest in video games.

Honoured I say. Disagree with her? Absolutely! Do it civilly and you earn the mark of maturity.

Welcome women's studies into videogames. Welcome race studies into videogames. Welcome sociology into videogames.

Do these things and you welcome maturity into videogames.

All I'm saying is that just because I'm not making a video series about gender issues, doesn't mean I can't criticize her video series about gender issues or any aspect of it.

We are in agreement about the fundamentals but you seem to think it only applies in her defence. If she can criticize game Dev when she doesn't make games (which is PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE btw) then I can criticize her even though I don't make videos about gender issues.

the guy I quoted was trying to make the case that, because WE (the commenters),have no ability/want to make serious youtube videos , we have no right to criticize/review her videos or plans for videos.I refuted that notion by applying his logic to the game devs (which apparently you agree would be a ridiculous notion) she is criticizing. I have zero issue with whatever you are rambling about, and your time would be better spent arguing with someone who does.

Just take a step back, and read my posts in context again if you don't believe me. I am not arguing with you. I'm just saying that if she can criticize people, people should be able to criticize her.

Free speech/freedom of expression and all that jazz. The hate mail she got was still unacceptable though, that falls beyond the purview of simple criticism

 

[Beardly]

I think you may have this a bit back-to-front boy. While she may have spammed 4-chan she made her target well before any controversy. Indeed she made $24,000 before the animalistic hoard descended upon her (Figuratively I mean.)

If the sexist comments of a few enabled her to leverage another $125,000, well what the bleeding hell did they expect? Sexist attacks on a feminist web-saavy blogger kickstarter? Gold!

How do you not see something wrong with goading a group of known internet misogynists so that she could stir up controversy and play the victim?

 

[TAdamson]

I played devils advocate by basically responding with "well she should just go make a game then, because devs could say the same thing to her (go make a game with "good female representation yourself, instead of telling me what to do), if we accept that as a valid argument".

I wasn't so much making an argument as negating another. I don't think the devs or other people should use that argument, but I am also saying she (and her defenders) can't use that argument either.

make a bit more sense?

"make a bit more sense?"

The argument appeared to be that she should make a game.

I can see how this argument could be whimsical but that still boils down to: "Ha if you're so smart why don't you make a game that isn't sexist?"

Anita Sarkeesian has no ability to make a game. Her expertise is in sociology so whether you agree with her view or not:

She's not a programmer, she's not a game designer.

But that does not disqualify her from being game reviewer nor commentator.

There are many commentators in the industry and in other mediums that have no technical expertise in the medium that that discuss. The fact that they have experienced the medium is enough.

The fact that she has a Postgraduate degree in Social Thought should give her a unique perspective on the subject and gamers should be honoured to have someone of that calibre display an academic interest in video games.

Honoured I say. Disagree with her? Absolutely! Do it civilly and you earn the mark of maturity.

Welcome women's studies into videogames. Welcome race studies into videogames. Welcome sociology into videogames.

Do these things and you welcome maturity into videogames.

All I'm saying is that just because I'm not making a video series about gender issues, doesn't mean I can't criticize her video series about gender issues or any aspect of it.

We are in agreement about the fundamentals but you seem to think it only applies in her defence. If she can criticize game Dev when she doesn't make games (which is PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE btw) then I can criticize her even though I don't make videos about gender issues.

the guy I quoted was trying to make the case that, because WE (the commenters),have no ability/want to make serious youtube videos , we have no right to criticize/review her videos or plans for videos.I refuted that notion by applying his logic to the game devs (which apparently you agree would be a ridiculous notion) she is criticizing. I have zero issue with whatever you are rambling about, and your time would be better spent arguing with someone who does.

Just take a step back, and read my posts in context again if you don't believe me. I am not arguing with you. I'm just saying that if she can criticize people, people should be able to criticize her.

Free speech/freedom of expression and all that jazz. The hate mail she got was still unacceptable though, that falls beyond the purview of simple criticism

I played devils advocate by basically responding with "well she should just go make a game then, because devs could say the same thing to her (go make a game with "good female representation yourself, instead of telling me what to do), if we accept that as a valid argument".

I wasn't so much making an argument as negating another. I don't think the devs or other people should use that argument, but I am also saying she (and her defenders) can't use that argument either.

make a bit more sense?

The argument appeared to be that she should make a game.

I can see how this argument could be whimsical but that still boils down to: "Ha if you're so smart why don't you make a game that isn't sexist?"

Anita Sarkeesian has no ability to make a game. Her expertise is in sociology so whether you agree with her view or not:

She's not a programmer, she's not a game designer.

But that does not disqualify her from being game reviewer nor commentator.

There are many commentators in the industry and in other mediums that have no technical expertise in the medium that that discuss. The fact that they have experienced the medium is enough.

The fact that she has a Postgraduate degree in Social Thought should give her a unique perspective on the subject and gamers should be honoured to have someone of that calibre display an academic interest in video games.

Honoured I say. Disagree with her? Absolutely! Do it civilly and you earn the mark of maturity.

Welcome women's studies into videogames. Welcome race studies into videogames. Welcome sociology into videogames.

Do these things and you welcome maturity into videogames.

All I'm saying is that just because I'm not making a video series about gender issues, doesn't mean I can't criticize her video series about gender issues or any aspect of it.

We are in agreement about the fundamentals but you seem to think it only applies in her defence. If she can criticize game Dev when she doesn't make games (which is PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE btw) then I can criticize her even though I don't make videos about gender issues.

the guy I quoted was trying to make the case that, because WE (the commenters),have no ability/want to make serious youtube videos , we have no right to criticize/review her videos or plans for videos.I refuted that notion by applying his logic to the game devs (which apparently you agree would be a ridiculous notion) she is criticizing. I have zero issue with whatever you are rambling about, and your time would be better spent arguing with someone who does.

Just take a step back, and read my posts in context again if you don't believe me. I am not arguing with you. I'm just saying that if she can criticize people, people should be able to criticize her.

Free speech/freedom of expression and all that jazz. The hate mail she got was still unacceptable though, that falls beyond the purview of simple criticism

I think I agree with all your points. Excuse me if I seem rude I have a habit of attacking only what a person said last (Usually because it's the only thing I can be bothered reading.)
or using what they said as a leaping off point.

I was in this post pointing out that you seemed to be claiming that she had no right to critise something she could not herself make.

It's obvious that we both agree that's ridiculous so I retract the accusation.

It's also obvious that we both agree the the abuse directed towards Sarkeesian was disgusting.

Any just criticism of Sarkeesian is valid but one must be careful.

Much of the criticism I have seen directed towards her is not about the substance of her opinions but directed to the quality of those supporting her.

Or they dream up fail-worthy claims of society's misandry to counter her claims of misogyny. When guys try to claim that they have it just as bad or worse than women it's embarrassing to be of the same gender as them.

Then there are the outright claims that she has no right to have the opinions that she has.

In a free society that is truly awful.

 

[TAdamson]

I think you may have this a bit back-to-front boy. While she may have spammed 4-chan she made her target well before any controversy. Indeed she made $24,000 before the animalistic hoard descended upon her (Figuratively I mean.)

If the sexist comments of a few enabled her to leverage another $125,000, well what the bleeding hell did they expect? Sexist attacks on a feminist web-saavy blogger kickstarter? Gold!

How do you not see something wrong with goading a group of known internet misogynists so that she could stir up controversy and play the victim?

How could you not see something wrong with a known group of internet misogynists?

 

[Beardly]

I think you may have this a bit back-to-front boy. While she may have spammed 4-chan she made her target well before any controversy. Indeed she made $24,000 before the animalistic hoard descended upon her (Figuratively I mean.)

If the sexist comments of a few enabled her to leverage another $125,000, well what the bleeding hell did they expect? Sexist attacks on a feminist web-saavy blogger kickstarter? Gold!

How do you not see something wrong with goading a group of known internet misogynists so that she could stir up controversy and play the victim?

How could you not see something wrong with a known group of internet misogynists?

Don't imply that I don't. I'm just pointing out that what she did is equivalent to throwing a rock at a bees' nest so that people will feel bad about you getting stung by bees.

 

[malestrithe]

Well, I agree withe the sentiment, and I'm glad this was placed before the backlash. Now, I'll get to see this rise to absurd numbers when the teenage white male demographic comes a knocking.

You might have the wrong forum for that.

It's at close to 900 posts in less than 60 hours since it was first posted. I was not wrong.