The Big Picture: With Great Power

[Uhura]

@Deadagent

Right... The quote comes from her Kickstarter page http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/566429325/tropes-vs-women-in-video-games
And you don't know wether she was able to 'use the equipment without any money' before or not. There's no need to make things up.

It's like you haven't even bothered to view her Kickstarter page. On her Kickstarter page she clearly stated what she was going to do with the money and after the fundraising was over, she made a blog post where she gave further information on how she was using the Kickstarter money. Oh the horror, what an awful person!

 

[Gindil]

Anita had the camera, mic, green screen and editing software before the Kickstarter.

Do you have proof of this? I've never watched any of her videos myself, so I'm actually asking.

Look at her Kickstarter video. She has all of the equipment as well as a mountain of games to pretend she's a gamer.

Further, she made 35 videos already, while also having all of the equipment to perform everything already. She was unpolished in her first few videos, but the ones now were a lot better for asking for a "professional" presentation.

 

[JimB]

Look at her Kickstarter video. She has all of the equipment as well as a mountain of games to pretend she's a gamer.

I did watch the video. I don't understand how it proves your position, though. Is your argument that if she could film a Kickstarter video, then there must not be any better equipment available for her to purchase?

She was unpolished in her first few videos, but the ones now were a lot better for asking for a "professional" presentation.

...Did you forget a word somewhere, or are you agreeing that the quality of her work has improved? Because you said here that she asked for a professional presentation and her current videos are indeed a lot better.

Incidentally, I am willing to stipulate that you dislike Ms. Sarkeesian. You do not have to go out of your way to remind me of the fact by calling her a liar when she claims to enjoy a hobby.

 

[Gindil]

Look at her Kickstarter video. She has all of the equipment as well as a mountain of games to pretend she's a gamer.

I did watch the video. I don't understand how it proves your position, though. Is your argument that if she could film a Kickstarter video, then there must not be any better equipment available for her to purchase?

She had all of the tools available to her already. She had the systems, the games, and all of the recording equipment that came from her financing with ***** magazine on her first series. Hell, if her kickstarter page is anything to go by, she already had the lighting... So what exactly did she need?

She was unpolished in her first few videos, but the ones now were a lot better for asking for a "professional" presentation.

...Did you forget a word somewhere, or are you agreeing that the quality of her work has improved? Because you said here that she asked for a professional presentation and her current videos are indeed a lot better.

Incidentally, I am willing to stipulate that you dislike Ms. Sarkeesian. You do not have to go out of your way to remind me of the fact by calling her a liar when she claims to enjoy a hobby.

[/quote]

I mean her first few videos from the beginning on YT. Her quality since then has indeed gone up but around the time of her Smurfette Principle video, the quality is the same. She has a light now, but besides that, she's basically using the gaming industry for a paycheck. But I'm not the only one hypothesizing because Anita's... Character kind of puts me at odds with what she's doing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bLpUcd8-cI

Look, it's rather obvious that she's a liar. The games she has... Some don't support her argument about female representation in games:

http://www.destructoid.com/blogs/Stephanie+K/damsel-in-distress-the-sarkeesian-dilemma-234680.phtml

In the picture at the top is Starcraft II. I recall rhythm games as gender neutral and they're still pretty popular. But for SC II the "Queen ***** of the Universe" is Sarah Kerrigan, who is pretty damn pissed at how she was treated by Emperor Mengsk.

Calling Ico sexist for hand holding is pretty hilarious. And she's gotten the stories wrong while being Johnny come lately based on how the Nostalgia team did all of this first along with Extra Credits doing it better.

And for the life of me... For the last year or two, what has this accomplished? We have people so focused on this stupid gender war that they forget how gaming was about fun regardless of the sex of the hero. There's plenty of people talking about how to solve the problem*, but they do it without having to name call.

* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiUvJNMlqxY

 

[JimB]

Hell, if her Kickstarter page is anything to go by, she already had the lighting...So what exactly did she need?

The things she listed in her video and her Kickstarter page? I don't know what answer you're looking for, here.

I'm not the only one hypothesizing because Anita's...character kind of puts me at odds with what she's doing.

No, but you are the one I'm currently talking to. If I have questions for those other people, I'll ask them.

Look, it's rather obvious that she's a liar. The games she has... Some don't support her argument about female representation in games:

http://www.destructoid.com/blogs/Stephanie+K/damsel-in-distress-the-sarkeesian-dilemma-234680.phtml

I'm confused. Is this link supposed to go to a story that mentions her video game library? Because it doesn't.

And in any event, so what if she has some games that don't support her argument? Is she arguing that all video games, universally and as a rule for which no exception exists, support her position?

Calling Ico sexist for hand-holding is pretty hilarious.

I haven't seen her videos, so I don't know what she said, but I would guess her point is it's sexist that the female character is so passive and devoid of any kind of agency or even survival instinct that she can or will neither run nor defend herself when she's about to be devoured by shadow monsters.

For the last year or two, what has this accomplished?

What would you like it to accomplish?

 

[Machine Man 1992]

Those "homophobic, sexist, trolls" you rail against are just that-- trolls. They aren't going away, ever, no matter how much mainstreaming is done.

So man the fuck up and deal with it.

And what do you care anyway? You, by your own admission, don't play games online, outsider.

He didn't say trolls, you did. Unless you're quoting someone else in this thread and forgot to actually quote them.

No, we shouldn't have to deal with that crap, and there are ways to disown the trolls, to let them know they're not welcome in the community, to refuse to play with them, to ban them from forums, they'll still exist, but they won't be among us if we just put a little freaking effort in to calling them out.

Oh, and nice job being open-minded there about people that don't play games online, wanker...

I'm used to posting on TVtropes. If I could, "outsider" would have been a link to "Joking Mode" but whatev's.

You do realize the only way to make trolls go away is to just ignore them right? It's kind of ironic that your solution to discrimination is MORE discrimination, when a FUCKING MUTE BUTTON EXISTS.

Honestly, am I the only one who knows that there is a way to silence players you don't like? Am I the only one who looks in the goddamned options menu, and checks to see what my voice chat settings are?

Why has it gotten to the point where individual initiative has taken a back seat to molly coddling thin-skinned whiners, who can't handle the fact that people say mean things on the internet?

Given the tone of the rest of your commentary, the notion that you were joking about the "outsider" thing was in no way readily apparent.

And ignoring a problem doesn't make it go away, it just hides from it while the problem continues to fester.

Yeah, we all know about the mute button and use it, but that hasn't done anything to stop people spewing that hatred, hasn't stopped them from putting off people playing for the first time who don't yet know that apparently the only way to enjoy a game online is to mute people left, right and center, and it doesn't stop people spewing hatred in text chat or forums, your solution is only a bandaid for one manifestation of the problem.

And again, it is totally okay to discriminate against people who by their ACTIONS have proven themselves hateful, petty, infantile or otherwise not good company, if a kid goes around punching other kids in daycare then they get sent to time out, we don't tell the parents that they'll just have to provide their kids body armour or hand-to-hand combat training.

We shouldn't have to put up with such shit is the thing, it is not being thin-skinned to point at a relentlessly racist, sexist, homophobic person and say "you're a douchenozzle, GTFO." We don't put up with such shit in our real life social circles or in real world sports, so again, why should we put up with it in videogames? Why should we prove we can endure or ignore it endlessly?

If a tree falls in a forest, and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

If a troll is saying hurtful things, but nobody can hear them, do they really matter?

And yet people do still clearly hear them, because they're still an issue that exists, because they're still loud and creative enough to force themselves to be heard. The very fact that we're having this discussion proves that they are being heard, because we know the problem exists and is putting people off even if you refuse to acknowledge it.

And honestly, if people are put off because someone (who, again, can easily be silenced) is saying mean things, then fuck 'em.

What would you have me do? This whole "we need to stop saying hurtful things on Xbox Live!' thing is garbage, accomplishes nothing, and in fact accomplishes less than nothing because it just tells the trolls that they're getting a reaction.

If you refuse to acknowledge them, you deny them their power. Trolls only look for a reaction, and the more passive aggressive the reaction (ie bitching about it on forums), the more direct and forceful they become to get a direct action.

Annnd here's the point where I tell you you're full of shit.

I'm one of those that was bullied for years back in primary school, never the physical stuff funnily enough... save for once, there was this particular douchenozzle that I made a point of ignoring, and he threw tambark (those woodchip things you see in some playgrounds) in my face, damn near blinded me.

In the years after, ignoring stupid kids didn't quite have that same escalation factor, but nor did it stop them from doing it. Again, if people are still being trolls despite you and presumably a lot of other people muting and ignoring them, this proves your approach is ineffective.

What exactly is wrong with a time out for people who do the wrong thing? Either they shape up and learn something from their time being cut off from the games they play, or they don't and keep getting temporarily banned, right up until the point they prove they'll never learn and get perma-banned.

First off, I don't give two goddamned shits about what happened in fucking primary school. If you can't get over that, that's your problem.

Second, there is a reporting system in place to ban abusive players. Except the thing is mostly used to ban players who cheat so whatever.

 

[Phrostbit3n]

Those "homophobic, sexist, trolls" you rail against are just that-- trolls. They aren't going away, ever, no matter how much mainstreaming is done.

So man the fuck up and deal with it.

And what do you care anyway? You, by your own admission, don't play games online, outsider.

He didn't say trolls, you did. Unless you're quoting someone else in this thread and forgot to actually quote them.

No, we shouldn't have to deal with that crap, and there are ways to disown the trolls, to let them know they're not welcome in the community, to refuse to play with them, to ban them from forums, they'll still exist, but they won't be among us if we just put a little freaking effort in to calling them out.

Oh, and nice job being open-minded there about people that don't play games online, wanker...

I'm used to posting on TVtropes. If I could, "outsider" would have been a link to "Joking Mode" but whatev's.

You do realize the only way to make trolls go away is to just ignore them right? It's kind of ironic that your solution to discrimination is MORE discrimination, when a FUCKING MUTE BUTTON EXISTS.

Honestly, am I the only one who knows that there is a way to silence players you don't like? Am I the only one who looks in the goddamned options menu, and checks to see what my voice chat settings are?

Why has it gotten to the point where individual initiative has taken a back seat to molly coddling thin-skinned whiners, who can't handle the fact that people say mean things on the internet?

Given the tone of the rest of your commentary, the notion that you were joking about the "outsider" thing was in no way readily apparent.

And ignoring a problem doesn't make it go away, it just hides from it while the problem continues to fester.

Yeah, we all know about the mute button and use it, but that hasn't done anything to stop people spewing that hatred, hasn't stopped them from putting off people playing for the first time who don't yet know that apparently the only way to enjoy a game online is to mute people left, right and center, and it doesn't stop people spewing hatred in text chat or forums, your solution is only a bandaid for one manifestation of the problem.

And again, it is totally okay to discriminate against people who by their ACTIONS have proven themselves hateful, petty, infantile or otherwise not good company, if a kid goes around punching other kids in daycare then they get sent to time out, we don't tell the parents that they'll just have to provide their kids body armour or hand-to-hand combat training.

We shouldn't have to put up with such shit is the thing, it is not being thin-skinned to point at a relentlessly racist, sexist, homophobic person and say "you're a douchenozzle, GTFO." We don't put up with such shit in our real life social circles or in real world sports, so again, why should we put up with it in videogames? Why should we prove we can endure or ignore it endlessly?

If a tree falls in a forest, and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

If a troll is saying hurtful things, but nobody can hear them, do they really matter?

And yet people do still clearly hear them, because they're still an issue that exists, because they're still loud and creative enough to force themselves to be heard. The very fact that we're having this discussion proves that they are being heard, because we know the problem exists and is putting people off even if you refuse to acknowledge it.

And honestly, if people are put off because someone (who, again, can easily be silenced) is saying mean things, then fuck 'em.

What would you have me do? This whole "we need to stop saying hurtful things on Xbox Live!' thing is garbage, accomplishes nothing, and in fact accomplishes less than nothing because it just tells the trolls that they're getting a reaction.

If you refuse to acknowledge them, you deny them their power. Trolls only look for a reaction, and the more passive aggressive the reaction (ie bitching about it on forums), the more direct and forceful they become to get a direct action.

Annnd here's the point where I tell you you're full of shit.

I'm one of those that was bullied for years back in primary school, never the physical stuff funnily enough... save for once, there was this particular douchenozzle that I made a point of ignoring, and he threw tambark (those woodchip things you see in some playgrounds) in my face, damn near blinded me.

In the years after, ignoring stupid kids didn't quite have that same escalation factor, but nor did it stop them from doing it. Again, if people are still being trolls despite you and presumably a lot of other people muting and ignoring them, this proves your approach is ineffective.

What exactly is wrong with a time out for people who do the wrong thing? Either they shape up and learn something from their time being cut off from the games they play, or they don't and keep getting temporarily banned, right up until the point they prove they'll never learn and get perma-banned.

First off, I don't give two goddamned shits about what happened in fucking primary school. If you can't get over that, that's your problem.

Second, there is a reporting system in place to ban abusive players. Except the thing is mostly used to ban players who cheat so whatever.

Thank you Machine, have my applause.

leviadragon99, whether someone said 'fuck' or not on XBox Live is really none of your damned business. We have a thing in most countries now called "Freedom of Speech". Honestly if you can't take the headset off long enough to not burst into tears you don't have any business playing most games on XBL.

 

[leviadragon99]

Those "homophobic, sexist, trolls" you rail against are just that-- trolls. They aren't going away, ever, no matter how much mainstreaming is done.

So man the fuck up and deal with it.

And what do you care anyway? You, by your own admission, don't play games online, outsider.

He didn't say trolls, you did. Unless you're quoting someone else in this thread and forgot to actually quote them.

No, we shouldn't have to deal with that crap, and there are ways to disown the trolls, to let them know they're not welcome in the community, to refuse to play with them, to ban them from forums, they'll still exist, but they won't be among us if we just put a little freaking effort in to calling them out.

Oh, and nice job being open-minded there about people that don't play games online, wanker...

I'm used to posting on TVtropes. If I could, "outsider" would have been a link to "Joking Mode" but whatev's.

You do realize the only way to make trolls go away is to just ignore them right? It's kind of ironic that your solution to discrimination is MORE discrimination, when a FUCKING MUTE BUTTON EXISTS.

Honestly, am I the only one who knows that there is a way to silence players you don't like? Am I the only one who looks in the goddamned options menu, and checks to see what my voice chat settings are?

Why has it gotten to the point where individual initiative has taken a back seat to molly coddling thin-skinned whiners, who can't handle the fact that people say mean things on the internet?

Given the tone of the rest of your commentary, the notion that you were joking about the "outsider" thing was in no way readily apparent.

And ignoring a problem doesn't make it go away, it just hides from it while the problem continues to fester.

Yeah, we all know about the mute button and use it, but that hasn't done anything to stop people spewing that hatred, hasn't stopped them from putting off people playing for the first time who don't yet know that apparently the only way to enjoy a game online is to mute people left, right and center, and it doesn't stop people spewing hatred in text chat or forums, your solution is only a bandaid for one manifestation of the problem.

And again, it is totally okay to discriminate against people who by their ACTIONS have proven themselves hateful, petty, infantile or otherwise not good company, if a kid goes around punching other kids in daycare then they get sent to time out, we don't tell the parents that they'll just have to provide their kids body armour or hand-to-hand combat training.

We shouldn't have to put up with such shit is the thing, it is not being thin-skinned to point at a relentlessly racist, sexist, homophobic person and say "you're a douchenozzle, GTFO." We don't put up with such shit in our real life social circles or in real world sports, so again, why should we put up with it in videogames? Why should we prove we can endure or ignore it endlessly?

If a tree falls in a forest, and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

If a troll is saying hurtful things, but nobody can hear them, do they really matter?

And yet people do still clearly hear them, because they're still an issue that exists, because they're still loud and creative enough to force themselves to be heard. The very fact that we're having this discussion proves that they are being heard, because we know the problem exists and is putting people off even if you refuse to acknowledge it.

And honestly, if people are put off because someone (who, again, can easily be silenced) is saying mean things, then fuck 'em.

What would you have me do? This whole "we need to stop saying hurtful things on Xbox Live!' thing is garbage, accomplishes nothing, and in fact accomplishes less than nothing because it just tells the trolls that they're getting a reaction.

If you refuse to acknowledge them, you deny them their power. Trolls only look for a reaction, and the more passive aggressive the reaction (ie bitching about it on forums), the more direct and forceful they become to get a direct action.

Annnd here's the point where I tell you you're full of shit.

I'm one of those that was bullied for years back in primary school, never the physical stuff funnily enough... save for once, there was this particular douchenozzle that I made a point of ignoring, and he threw tambark (those woodchip things you see in some playgrounds) in my face, damn near blinded me.

In the years after, ignoring stupid kids didn't quite have that same escalation factor, but nor did it stop them from doing it. Again, if people are still being trolls despite you and presumably a lot of other people muting and ignoring them, this proves your approach is ineffective.

What exactly is wrong with a time out for people who do the wrong thing? Either they shape up and learn something from their time being cut off from the games they play, or they don't and keep getting temporarily banned, right up until the point they prove they'll never learn and get perma-banned.

First off, I don't give two goddamned shits about what happened in fucking primary school. If you can't get over that, that's your problem.

Second, there is a reporting system in place to ban abusive players. Except the thing is mostly used to ban players who cheat so whatever.

Never said you did, just giving an example of why your tactic never works, it's just words parents tell their stressed out kids to try and stop them snapping and going Kano on the asses of schoolyard bullies, the hope that they might stop if you avoid them.

But even if it did, at what point exactly does a bully or a troll stop? How much abuse are we just supposed to assume the position for and take until they get bored and give up? Because let me tell you, I have never seen any troll give up in the face of dignified silence, I've never seen this mythical troll starvation due to lack of attention.

Maybe it's partly because there's always one person the troll can get a rise out of, so much in the same way you're saying it's hopeless to try and get trolls to change their behaviour, maybe it's similarly too much to ask for people not to get wound up by them, maybe the only real solution is the ban-hammer.

And cheating is also kind of a dick move, I can understand banning players who'd do that, just needs to be tweaked so it can also effectively target douchenozzle players.

 

[leviadragon99]

Those "homophobic, sexist, trolls" you rail against are just that-- trolls. They aren't going away, ever, no matter how much mainstreaming is done.

So man the fuck up and deal with it.

And what do you care anyway? You, by your own admission, don't play games online, outsider.

He didn't say trolls, you did. Unless you're quoting someone else in this thread and forgot to actually quote them.

No, we shouldn't have to deal with that crap, and there are ways to disown the trolls, to let them know they're not welcome in the community, to refuse to play with them, to ban them from forums, they'll still exist, but they won't be among us if we just put a little freaking effort in to calling them out.

Oh, and nice job being open-minded there about people that don't play games online, wanker...

I'm used to posting on TVtropes. If I could, "outsider" would have been a link to "Joking Mode" but whatev's.

You do realize the only way to make trolls go away is to just ignore them right? It's kind of ironic that your solution to discrimination is MORE discrimination, when a FUCKING MUTE BUTTON EXISTS.

Honestly, am I the only one who knows that there is a way to silence players you don't like? Am I the only one who looks in the goddamned options menu, and checks to see what my voice chat settings are?

Why has it gotten to the point where individual initiative has taken a back seat to molly coddling thin-skinned whiners, who can't handle the fact that people say mean things on the internet?

Given the tone of the rest of your commentary, the notion that you were joking about the "outsider" thing was in no way readily apparent.

And ignoring a problem doesn't make it go away, it just hides from it while the problem continues to fester.

Yeah, we all know about the mute button and use it, but that hasn't done anything to stop people spewing that hatred, hasn't stopped them from putting off people playing for the first time who don't yet know that apparently the only way to enjoy a game online is to mute people left, right and center, and it doesn't stop people spewing hatred in text chat or forums, your solution is only a bandaid for one manifestation of the problem.

And again, it is totally okay to discriminate against people who by their ACTIONS have proven themselves hateful, petty, infantile or otherwise not good company, if a kid goes around punching other kids in daycare then they get sent to time out, we don't tell the parents that they'll just have to provide their kids body armour or hand-to-hand combat training.

We shouldn't have to put up with such shit is the thing, it is not being thin-skinned to point at a relentlessly racist, sexist, homophobic person and say "you're a douchenozzle, GTFO." We don't put up with such shit in our real life social circles or in real world sports, so again, why should we put up with it in videogames? Why should we prove we can endure or ignore it endlessly?

If a tree falls in a forest, and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

If a troll is saying hurtful things, but nobody can hear them, do they really matter?

And yet people do still clearly hear them, because they're still an issue that exists, because they're still loud and creative enough to force themselves to be heard. The very fact that we're having this discussion proves that they are being heard, because we know the problem exists and is putting people off even if you refuse to acknowledge it.

And honestly, if people are put off because someone (who, again, can easily be silenced) is saying mean things, then fuck 'em.

What would you have me do? This whole "we need to stop saying hurtful things on Xbox Live!' thing is garbage, accomplishes nothing, and in fact accomplishes less than nothing because it just tells the trolls that they're getting a reaction.

If you refuse to acknowledge them, you deny them their power. Trolls only look for a reaction, and the more passive aggressive the reaction (ie bitching about it on forums), the more direct and forceful they become to get a direct action.

Annnd here's the point where I tell you you're full of shit.

I'm one of those that was bullied for years back in primary school, never the physical stuff funnily enough... save for once, there was this particular douchenozzle that I made a point of ignoring, and he threw tambark (those woodchip things you see in some playgrounds) in my face, damn near blinded me.

In the years after, ignoring stupid kids didn't quite have that same escalation factor, but nor did it stop them from doing it. Again, if people are still being trolls despite you and presumably a lot of other people muting and ignoring them, this proves your approach is ineffective.

What exactly is wrong with a time out for people who do the wrong thing? Either they shape up and learn something from their time being cut off from the games they play, or they don't and keep getting temporarily banned, right up until the point they prove they'll never learn and get perma-banned.

First off, I don't give two goddamned shits about what happened in fucking primary school. If you can't get over that, that's your problem.

Second, there is a reporting system in place to ban abusive players. Except the thing is mostly used to ban players who cheat so whatever.

Thank you Machine, have my applause.

leviadragon99, whether someone said 'fuck' or not on XBox Live is really none of your damned business. We have a thing in most countries now called "Freedom of Speech". Honestly if you can't take the headset off long enough to not burst into tears you don't have any business playing most games on XBL.

I don't have a problem with fuck, I have a problem with "******" "*****" "make me a sandwich" "raghead" and all the countless other vile things that makes up the core of online abuse.

And you seem to be forgetting that the internet is not America, Free Speech is not automatically protected here, more to the point, even in America you can get sued for libel, slander, discrimination and the like, free speech is certainly protected but abuse is not, the very code you stand by only gives you the right to say what you like, doesn't protect you from any consequences of saying such.

And I don't have an Xbox, partly because I keep hearing all of the bullshit people say on XBLA because it keeps coming up even if you're not an active member of that community, I have no interest in such a hostile environment but I could take it without bursting into tears, if for some reason I was forced into it I'd try to yell down the trolls, report them, mute them, all that stuff, but that sounds exhausting to have to keep doing that, and honestly, why bother going through all that bullshit just to try and play a game?

See that's the real problem, it's not me being thin skinned, it's just there's so much hatred people throw out that that we shouldn't have to deal with, that sours what should be a time of fun.

 

[Dragonbums]

As I've said earlier in the thread, she didn't ask for $150 000, she asked for $6 000, which is not an unreasonable amount if her intention was to buy enough games to get a more wholistic perspective on how the videogaming industry sees women

Even then, that's still a pretty hefty price tag. And again, to do WHAT with it? Buy more games? Improve video production (that again, doesn't even have seemed to change from the years she's been doing this)? Seek out extra help and/or somebody to bring in for another POV? Create DVDs/promotional stuff to take with you to places? You still don't get much of anything in the original kickstarter page. Is it too much to ask for some CLARITY and DETAILS about WTH you're doing other than vague, nondescript summations? Or am I just another one of "teh trolls" that's actually wants concrete answers to reasonable questions?

*sigh*

Dude, look at her Kickstarter page. She has extended the videos to more than six entries.
She has a whole host of them on the way now along with a variety of other bonuses.

Once again I'm gonna have to bring Jim Sterling into this.

The reason why people donated that much fucking money to her was because the reaction towards her and her videos- 4Chan be damned- was so fucking vile that even mainstream media caught attention to it. Knowing that news outlets barely do any research on anything in real life, don't expect them to dig into any research regarding internet drama.
Of course seeing this window of opportunity she used the very flames of her haters to further her own gain. It is OUR FAULT that she is as big as she is now. Ours.

Her videos are basically entry level college essays in picture form. As such, the gaming community as a whole should of treated her videos like all other mediocre videos- which is ignoring them.
We however decided to throw a temper tantrum the likes which have never been seen before.
Sending her death threats, and leaving messages like "I'm gonna rape you to a blood puddle" is a disgusting thing to say to anyone. The same mob mentality we criticize on a daily basis happened here, and it still happens on the Escapist.
I had one person compare her to Bill 'O Reily. Are you fucking serious?

 

[Gindil]

Hell, if her Kickstarter page is anything to go by, she already had the lighting...So what exactly did she need?

The things she listed in her video and her Kickstarter page? I don't know what answer you're looking for, here.

One that makes sense. I keep hearing she needed $6000 for research material but what research did she need when all of the materials were already available to critique games. There are already people reviewing games on smaller budgets and doing it incrementally. She already had everything for equipment... It doesn't add up. Why have a picture of you with the lighting if you need more funds?

I'm not the only one hypothesizing because Anita's...character kind of puts me at odds with what she's doing.

No, but you are the one I'm currently talking to. If I have questions for those other people, I'll ask them.

Nice sarcasm, but you missed the part where I linked you to a Youtube video where I back up my position by showing that I'm not the only one questioning her methods of accessing funds.

Look, it's rather obvious that she's a liar. The games she has... Some don't support her argument about female representation in games:

http://www.destructoid.com/blogs/Stephanie+K/damsel-in-distress-the-sarkeesian-dilemma-234680.phtml

I'm confused. Is this link supposed to go to a story that mentions her video game library? Because it doesn't.

The picture at the top of the page is the one I'm referring to where she bought all of these games.

And in any event, so what if she has some games that don't support her argument? Is she arguing that all video games, universally and as a rule for which no exception exists, support her position?

She's arguing that the video game industry has been sexist since 1981 based on Shigeru Miyamoto popularizing a trope that has been in all forms of media and depriving women of agency based on said trope. That's a pretty precarious position and she needs a lot of evidence to support that claim. It's rather obvious that she can't since the main tenets of her argument destroy her position:

1) She doesn't bring up female protagonists at all except that they're somehow in distress. Let's ignore how Samus needs medical attention in Metroid or how Blaze fights bad guys with a much faster speed. Nope, no women can be anything other than damsels.

2) Women are "robbed of their ability" to perform and be heroes in their own right. This makes no sense when you consider how Zelda is one of the most powerful people in ALL of her games. In the very first one, SHE is the one that hid the 8 pieces of the Triforce of Wisdom that Link went around to pick up. SHE is the one that fights for seven years while Link is in the Temple with the Master Sword. And Krystal is a fighter pilot in Starfox Assault, working with Fox because she's an empowered woman. But we have to ignore that because it doesn't fit with the narrative that women are damsels only.

3) Women are only secondary characters that fall into this trope. Except... They're not. Women have been heroes since the inception of gaming. The 1970s was all about fighter pilots and star ships and anyone is able to pick up a game and play it. She ignored how the original Mario Bros, a "core" game, didn't even use this mechanic along with Wrecking Crew which used Mario as a construction guy. And it's amazing how the women in RPGs fare a lot better and subvert, invert, and parody this trope but we don't hear about that either.

Basically, taking her argument at face value, there's a lot of problems with narrative coherence that flies in the face of what people understand about gaming in general. Namely, they save the girl, she's not property, and they like emotional impact which is received by saving a princess moreso than saving a prince who's supposed to avoid such things.

Calling Ico sexist for hand-holding is pretty hilarious.

I haven't seen her videos, so I don't know what she said, but I would guess her point is it's sexist that the female character is so passive and devoid of any kind of agency or even survival instinct that she can or will neither run nor defend herself when she's about to be devoured by shadow monsters.

Yeah... With ICO... He's a small boy and she does resist those monsters and she basically ignored ALL OF THE STORY to come to her conclusion that Ico is sexist. That's in her second video. She basically took the first video and cranked it up to 11.

For the last year or two, what has this accomplished?

What would you like it to accomplish?

Her videos? Heh, that's a foregone conclusion that she's using this to make money. So I just focus on the people that have already given better answers than her. Namely, Extra Credits, Kitetales, and others who don't have to lie to me to get their point across.

 

[Gindil]

As I've said earlier in the thread, she didn't ask for $150 000, she asked for $6 000, which is not an unreasonable amount if her intention was to buy enough games to get a more wholistic perspective on how the videogaming industry sees women

Even then, that's still a pretty hefty price tag. And again, to do WHAT with it? Buy more games? Improve video production (that again, doesn't even have seemed to change from the years she's been doing this)? Seek out extra help and/or somebody to bring in for another POV? Create DVDs/promotional stuff to take with you to places? You still don't get much of anything in the original kickstarter page. Is it too much to ask for some CLARITY and DETAILS about WTH you're doing other than vague, nondescript summations? Or am I just another one of "teh trolls" that's actually wants concrete answers to reasonable questions?

*sigh*

Dude, look at her Kickstarter page. She has extended the videos to more than six entries.
She has a whole host of them on the way now along with a variety of other bonuses.

Once again I'm gonna have to bring Jim Sterling into this.

The reason why people donated that much fucking money to her was because the reaction towards her and her videos- 4Chan be damned- was so fucking vile that even mainstream media caught attention to it. Knowing that news outlets barely do any research on anything in real life, don't expect them to dig into any research regarding internet drama.
Of course seeing this window of opportunity she used the very flames of her haters to further her own gain. It is OUR FAULT that she is as big as she is now. Ours.

Her videos are basically entry level college essays in picture form. As such, the gaming community as a whole should of treated her videos like all other mediocre videos- which is ignoring them.
We however decided to throw a temper tantrum the likes which have never been seen before.
Sending her death threats, and leaving messages like "I'm gonna rape you to a blood puddle" is a disgusting thing to say to anyone. The same mob mentality we criticize on a daily basis happened here, and it still happens on the Escapist.
I had one person compare her to Bill 'O Reily. Are you fucking serious?

....No we didn't. Us gamers just got blamed for her fight with 4chan and she farmed comments to make herself look good by exposing 1% of the people.

Anita manipulating public discourse to make herself the victim really isn't that far off from what she learned in college. And given all she's said about moderating trolls, it's quite odd that she wouldn't when money was a motivation for her to change their behavior.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bLpUcd8-cI

 

[Dragonbums]

....No we didn't. Us gamers just got blamed for her fight with 4chan and she farmed comments to make herself look good by exposing 1% of the people.

Anita manipulating public discourse to make herself the victim really isn't that far off from what she learned in college. And given all she's said about moderating trolls, it's quite odd that she wouldn't when money was a motivation for her to change their behavior.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bLpUcd8-cI

She never fought with 4Chan. She never challenged 4Chan on anything.
People on 4Chan play videogames too, and it was those who play videogames on 4Chan that decided that that was the day where one person was going to get hundreds of threats for making sub par videos.
Since only it was the people who play videogames on 4Chan that decided that Anita was going to be their next victim you can say gamers went on to flame Anita.

Her Kickstarter was never going to be used to "change her behavior", and I'm pretty sure if she took our money to "change" then she would be called much worse things here on the Escapist.
Her Kickstarter was specifically going to be used for making videos.
That's it.
That is literally fucking it.
There is no grand con scheme on the levels of the banks.
The people who donated to her are getting what they paid for. A video series. If you don't like it, fucking ignore her.
It what should of been done since the beginning.

And again, her manipulating?
Who's fault was that again?
Perhaps if we, as a collective acted like fucking adults instead of children then she wouldn't HAVE anything substantial to use against us.
But you know, keep building up the image that she is some Bill O' Reily of videogames.

 

[Boba Frag]

Loved the episode, Bob. Real food for thought there, and brought to us in your usual inimitable style.
I know there's a lot of a harrumphing on the first page of the forum comments, but, mission accomplished!
You've stirred the debate!

One thing I'd be concerned about is that now that the geeks are in charge of the asylum, or a substantial wing of it at least, that a certain malaise will set in.
I seldom post in the comments section on videos these days, or even post in the forums any more, but perhaps my own personal jaded feelings are clouding my perspective.

Then your video comes along and shakes me out of it a little. You're absolutely right, and I *like* your video structures, unlike some folks here, I crave examples

Keep fighting the good fight, Mr. Chipman!

 

[oooooooooooooooooooooooooo]

Again, no message, anyone know what's up the messaging thing right now?

Actually, after watching this* it makes a lot more sense that Anita has a motivation to do exactly that which also addresses her issue of no trope solving as well as showing where she gets her arguments...

*https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiUvJNMlqxY

I'm not sure I'm understanding your point here, though I do agree that I would like the discussion to head towards solutions and away from finger pointing. In terms of Sarkeesian's money interests, Uhura makes a very interesting point in this post: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/6.820668-The-Big-Picture-With-Great-Power?page=14#19828330

She did the politician thing of linking domestic violence with video games. She stated "Every 9 seconds a woman is being beaten by a spouse or loved one" (paraphrase) as if there's a causal link. Also, no. If you can look at this** chart and try to find a trend of sexism and misogyny, you're trying to come up with a presupposed conclusion. And seriously think about the technological limits that created Mario and other core games that didn't have that mechanic. You think that the original Mario Bros relied on this trope? It doesn't

Also, before we go on, if you're going to give me examples, I want full context, not things you don't agree with. When I pull up Carlos' death in Saints Row 2, in showing how men are brutalized and disposable, I'm going to tell you how you had to kill him to ease his suffering***. If you mean misogynistic as merely something you don't agree with, we're going to have a disagreement based on the semantic and etymological level. I'm talking about an actual hatred of women instead of merely villains. Oh, and Bowser is in the friend zone. ****

**http://videogamegeek.com/thread/885657/video-game-genre-percentages-per-year

*** Male - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Of6IIRjUhO8
***Female - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2OExIA4JDo

**** http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QP-4-8iKnpI

In terms of the domestic violence point, I covered that already with some other posters and as such shall do some more post directing, but suffice to say I pretty much agree that she shouldn't have brought it up.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/6.820668-The-Big-Picture-With-Great-Power?page=13#19826826
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/6.820668-The-Big-Picture-With-Great-Power?page=14#19827404

As for the examples of sexism, I'll take a few hours and pull together a response with more wholistic examples, but for now the basic premise is the subject vs object roles that men and women tend to fill. I mean we know right off the bat that most developers are outright forbidden from making their lead characters female by their publishers. We know that women are very very rarely allowed to be part of the audience testers, or whatever they are called. It's fairly easy to extrapolate from that that game industry, or at least the part of it that has the power to make these decisions, does not have any interest in sticking a woman or any sort of feminine identification in the role of the subject. We also know that a huge number of games use women as the object on which the subject and their (or rather, his, usually) story pivots, whether it be the dead girlfriends/wives like from Dante's Inferno, the new Castlevania, Kane and Lynch, Bionic Commando 2009, The Darkness games, Infamous 2, the God of War games, etc. or just the captured ones like from the Mario games, Zelda games, that Star Fox game Sarkeesian mentioned, etc. Sure, I suppose they individually make sense within each and every game, but if you're looking at how the game industry perceives women as a whole, they are nearly always just the thing that dies or gets captured in order to make the men do stuff. Let me put this to you, how many decent, strong female leads has the videogame industry produced in comparison to the number of male leads? I could list off dozens if not hundreds of male leads off the top of my head, while under female leads we have Faith, Jade and at a push Lara Croft. The fact of the matter is, if you look at the roles of women in videogames, they are nearly always plot points instead of characters, and sure some men are as well, but no where near the majority and men get to fill an array of roles beyond lead character motivation.

EDIT: Right well, the more wholistic examples post turned out not to really justify it's own post, so I might as well just list those examples here. We have the disgusting point in both Duke Nukem and Duke Nukem Forever with the half naked girls that have been arbitrarily put in to be mutilated and are asking to be killed, no men mind, just ex-sexy girls. We have Bayonetta, who exists for the sole purpose of eye candy, as do the Dead or Alive girls and I'm pretty certain the original Lara Croft and her ridiculous proportions sit here as well. I know I mentioned God of War, but I should also point out that just about every woman in the series either dies or is there to have sex with Cratos and put tits on the screen. We have the array of women in fantasy and fighting games who seem to have decided the best way to protect themselves is to wrap themselves in as little metal as possible, obviously for eye candy purposes. Even when we get to play as a female that is even slightly self-sufficient they either have to have Lara Croft-esque curves, or be in a skin tight jump suit and radiating sexuality, like Arkham City's Catwoman or Bayonetta. Or both. Hell, even Mass Effect, which is a series I adore and is overall pretty good on the sexism thing, has the Asari, a race of sexy, big breasted aliens. And there is no correlating examples whatsoever on the female side. Sure, characters like Cratos aren't wearing a huge amount, but that has bugger all to do with with sex appeal and everything do with making male players feel like a muscled bad ass. Again, we get ugly grizzled male leads like Marcus Phoenix, but a not single corresponding female lead of the type. Simply speaking, games are made with a male audience in mind and with absolutely no regard for the female audience.

You're shooting the forest for the trees. Anyone can pick up troll behavior and say that's "representative" of the rest of the culture. That's exactly what Bob did here. A troll wants a reaction and works to get one. That's why they're a vocal minority. You ignore trolls because they're not there to support a viewpoint. They're there for a reaction. Saying that the gaming community is responsible for the behaviors of trolls is like saying a guy in California should put a leash on the dog in Florida. It doesn't make any sense. It doesn't make any sense that I'm to blame for the actions of 4chan and trollish behavior. Sure, the comments are bad. But they are a minority of the discussion.

I'm not saying it's representative of anything, at this point I'd say geek culture is far to expansive for anything to be representative of it. Trolling is, however, an aspect of geek culture and I'm going to stick to that because lots of geeks troll. Sure, not all trolls are geeks, but as I was saying with my overlap point, we have loads of people in the geek or nerd community who are trolls and troll in relation to their geek association. I think it's no coincidence that the feminist who relieves the most bile is the one who is trying to uproot aspects of geek culture. I agree that they are a minority, but at this point that doesn't necessarily make them a small group and they're a hell of a vocal one at that are giving the entire community a bad name and understandably so since firstly so few of us seem willing to confront them and secondly since now that the sexism debate has been brought into the public eye, a lot of the non trolls seem unwilling to accept any change towards a more equal perspective on women within the industry.

Remember, she tweeted about them, didn't engage them and didn't engage people in charge of the show. She told the public and it got huge fast. Yet she made penis jokes and that's perfectly fine. It's hypocrisy. And no one would have known about her if she had handled the situation differently, ie with more respect to the people involved by just saying "Hey guys, can you cut it out?" instead of broadcasting them to the world. Again, I stress, you're shooting the forest for the trees by broadbrushing everyone and focusing on the few people that exhibit troll behavior.

Yes, and like I said before, what she did was wrong, not manipulative mind, but certainly wrong.

... Yeah, that just makes no sense. "It's not about her, it's about the attacks she received." But then that is still focusing on the few attacks that she received as trolling responses over the criticisms that she hasn't responded to. It's an emotional plea that ignores actual conversation about the points raised. Politicians love doing this.

Except it demonstrates the perception women in the industry. Trolling or not, we've seen a sizable chunk of the community has absolutely no issue with acting in a misogynistic manner just to get their stupid pot shots off at a feminist. We've also seen as a result that a much bigger part of the community doesn't seem to give a shit about how women are perceived or treated within the community.

"For every action, there is an equal but opposite reaction."

And loads of people calling her a fat ***** was an equal but opposite reaction?

Which puts us yet again to the point you keep missing. You keep responding that this is a product of geek culture. This is not true. 4chan has a unique community the same as there are various gamer cultures. I love being a geek, gamer, or whatever else but I hate how people continuously lump me and people I enjoy talking to into the same pool as trolls. It's beyond insulting. We should have the conversation of Anita vs 4chan, not gamer culture. Because the gamer culture responded by showing that her arguments are illogical and shallow. So I implore that next time, learn why 4chan is known for trolling people and the reactions they want. Stop blaming separate cultures for things they did not do.

And again, I don't buy that. Like you said, things aren't black and white and 4chan and geek culture are far from mutually exclusive. In fact I'm just about the only one of my friend group that identifies as a nerd and doesn't go on 4chan. You may personally have nothing to do with 4chan, like me, but that doesn't mean nerd/geek culture doesn't. Trolling is as much a product and aspect of geek culture as it is of 4chan and the likes.

Uhm... Your argument is that gamers make misogynistic comments based on not liking what Anita is doing because she's a woman. That's exactly what you're doing by claiming that gamers couldn't respond to her civilly (which she will never comment about anyway).

And as I've said, you're confusing those trolls with gamers that didn't care about Anita until she spammed Kickstarter for sympathy.

Seriously, how did you get there? I never said anything about gamers being unable to respond to her civilly, in fact after literally spelling out in previous posts that these aren't the majority of games, that many people do have perfectly valid criticisms of her and that I myself think some of her points are nonsense and literally saying in the post you quoted "no one is claiming gamers are all misogynistic, I have now in fact repeatedly said the opposite", I really cannot understand how you concluded that that was my argument.

Ok, I think I understand where you are coming from and I see how some might find the whole domestic violence angle a bit heavy-handed. I think we have to agree to disagree on the whole 'how big of an influence popular media really is' thing, because it's getting really off topic.

Fair enough, disagreement agreed upon.

 

[Sergey Sund]

While I fundamentaly agree with what was said, I don't think "geeks" are the problem here.
Bob's mom would probably count as a "geek" - your average Call of Duty player wouldn't.
What I'm getting at is that "geeks" and "nerds" were/are called that because they get obsessive over certain topics (comics, games, movies, series) and accumulate large amounts of backround knowledge.
As our niche grew larger and had more financial impact, the mainstream started cattering to us. This, however, attracted exactly the kind of "follow the herd", "this is cool now" douchebags that include bullies and the hip people that geeks wanted to distance themselves from.
The overall topic of mainstream isn't a good yardstick for geek culture any more, is what I'm saying.
By Bob's argument, anyone who saw the newest Star Trek was a "geek". This, I argue, is not so. To throw a number out there, 70% of the audience hasn't seen Star Trek in any other form than the movies, 80% hasn't seen any previous series, and 95% will only know James T. Kirk from the KHAAAAAAAN meme.
Nerds and Geeks will always have more backround knowledge in those topics.
But since video games, for example, have become "cool" all those homophobic, racist idiots have started taking it up.
I think the distinction here is huge: Games like Portal sell less copies than Call of Duty.
Why?
Because geeks are into those kind of games - the "new flock" isn't. They want their next FIFA, their next, exactly-the-same CoD and Halo.
And it is this misconception that leads many publishers astray: They market their games as if they were selling to geeks, but, increasingly, they really are targeting a wholy different demographic.
And some games producers mess this up completely and think that the mayority of gamers (non-geeks) and geeks are the same, so we get games that are targeted at geeks, while having eg. female stereotypes in them (big tits, little clothing) which the other demo appreciates, and us geeks just shake our heads against.

 

[JimB]

Gindil, even though I disagree with you, I do try to be civil in discourse. That probably sounds like the beginning of a threat, or maybe of an announcement that I intend to rescind that civility, but it really isn't (well, mostly). I bring it up because I am in a shit mood right now, and I do not know how effectively I'll be able to maintain the tone of civility I aim for. If I do falter, please know that most of my anger is coming from crap I've been dealing with elsewhere and is not meant as a personal condemnation; and while you're at it, feel free to call me out on any lapses. I'd appreciate that.

Okay then, here we go.

[Regarding what Anita Sarkeesian needed a Kickstarter for, I want answers] that makes sense.

I--I really don't know what to tell you. She made all but an itemized list of the equipment she wanted. Uhura provided a link to the page where she does so. Six thousand dollars won't even cover the "hundreds of game titles" she wanted to buy, at sixty bucks per console game.

Why have a picture of you with the lighting if you need more funds?

To indicate that the setup she has right now is a low-budget affair taking place in a room in her own apartment, I'd wager.

Nice sarcasm, but you missed the part where I linked you to a Youtube video where I back up my position by showing that I'm not the only one questioning her methods of accessing funds.

I didn't miss it; I ignored it. I don't care who else is asking the same questions you are. I'm not talking to them. I'm talking to you. I do not want to debate with someone who isn't here, and I don't want to try to figure out whether the answers you give are your own or if you cribbed them from someone else and I can only hope they're accurate to you.

She's arguing that the video game industry has been sexist since 1981 based on Shigeru Miyamoto popularizing a trope that has been in all forms of media and depriving women of agency based on said trope.

Er...so? All that means is she needs 51% accuracy to be right in her generalizations.

She doesn't bring up female protagonists at all except that they're somehow in distress.

Um, again, check out her Kickstarter page. Female protagonists are not the subject of her damsels in distress video. They are the subject of future videos. You're criticizing her for not talking about something she never said she's talking about.

Women are "robbed of their ability" to perform and be heroes in their own right. This makes no sense when you consider how Zelda is one of the most powerful people in all of her games. In the very first one, she is the one who hid the eight pieces of the Triforce of Wisdom that Link went around to pick up.

Yes, she broke the weapon that allowed Link to kill Ganon instead of using it to do the job herself. Honestly, why couldn't Zelda have been the protagonist? Why couldn't the story have been rewritten so Ganon's attempt to claim the Triforce shattered it, and Zelda had to do the work herself of gathering the pieces, finding the weapons, and killing the bad guy instead of having to wait in a dungeon to be rescued by a boy who fixed the weapon she broke instead of using?

She is the one that fights for seven years while Link is in the Temple with the Master Sword.

And does a piss-poor job of it, too, because she made less impact in seven years of fighting Ganon than Link did in roughly two weeks. It's arguable that this is unfair of me to observe, what with Link being the fated hero with the magical MacGuffin sword and all, but again, Link's status as plot-driven hero is a completely arbitrary decision. Why couldn't Zelda be the fated hero? What's stopping the writers from giving her the MacGuffin Sword?

And Krystal is a fighter pilot in Starfox Assault, working with Fox because she's an empowered woman. But we have to ignore that because it doesn't fit with the narrative that women are damsels only.

I've never played that game and never will, but does Krystal ever accomplish anything Fox doesn't, aside from getting trapped inside a rock?

Women are only secondary characters that fall into this trope. Except...they're not. Women have been heroes since the inception of gaming. The 1970s was all about fighter pilots and starships, and anyone is able to pick up a game and play it.

A character has a name. That a game can be played by a woman doesn't mean the character is female. The only character in those game exists in the player's mind, and that's useless to talk about, since she's talking about the industry, not the players.

She ignored how the original Mario Bros, a "core" game, didn't even use this mechanic along with Wrecking Crew which used Mario as a construction guy.

I'm confused. What mechanic are you talking about? You haven't referenced a mechanic at any point in this paragraph.

And it's amazing how the women in RPGs fare a lot better and subvert, invert, and parody this trope, but we don't hear about that either.

Again, those are probably coming up in future videos. At a guess, I'll say "Voodoo Priestess/Tribal Sorceress" and/or "Man with Boobs."

Basically, taking her argument at face value, there's a lot of problems with narrative coherence that flies in the face of what people understand about gaming in general. Namely, they save the girl, she's not property, and they like emotional impact which is received by saving a princess moreso than saving a prince who's supposed to avoid such things.

And that final sentence there is proof of her position, isn't it? Princes--men--aren't supposed to be victimized and saved; that is for women.

Her videos? Heh, that's a foregone conclusion that she's using this to make money.

I did not ask you what you think her videos will accomplish. I asked you what you want them to accomplish. Is there a problem here that needs addressing? If so, what is it, and how?

 

[runic knight]

Thank you Machine, have my applause.

leviadragon99, whether someone said 'fuck' or not on XBox Live is really none of your damned business. We have a thing in most countries now called "Freedom of Speech". Honestly if you can't take the headset off long enough to not burst into tears you don't have any business playing most games on XBL.

For the love of.... you are aware that freedom of speech does not work that way, yes? All freedom of speech does is guarantee that the state can not unduly infringe upon your right to say what you want (unless it directly infringes on the rights of others, such as open threats, revealing security information or causing dangerous situations, all of which could endanger right to life).

A SERVICE used to play a game can set up whatever requirements that they want, including prohibition on language. You agree to it in order to use the service, they are not entitled to pander to your desire to use them as a message board. This is the same way that freedom of speech does not entitle you to go onto your neighbor's property and spraypaint slogans on their walls.

Any attempt to claim freedom of speech protects you in this regard reveals an ignorance to the actual law and an entitlement that makes you very easy to dismiss as big mouth kid rather then someone to take seriously. I'd suggest you be more careful about trying to claim other people have to let you use their stuff to speak your messages. Freedom of speech only prevents the government from not letting you speak, it says nothing what so ever about giving you permission to use someone else's property in order to do so.

 

[runic knight]

-snip-

Some issues I have here. I do hope you don't take this too rudely, not meaning to be uncivil though I know I can and do come off as such.

First,

Er...so? All that means is she needs 51% accuracy to be right in her generalizations.

I find that a terrible, terrible notion. Aside from the general worthlessness of generalizations in any form of research, I can get a very strong racist/sexist justification vibe coming from it, which is odd given your stance to the contrary. On top of that, no data has been given regarding how common the trope is in relation to anything else, so beside being a worthless generalization in research, it is an unsupported worthless generalization at that.

Yes, she broke the weapon that allowed Link to kill Ganon instead of using it to do the job herself. Honestly, why couldn't Zelda have been the protagonist? Why couldn't the story have been rewritten so Ganon's attempt to claim the Triforce shattered it, and Zelda had to do the work herself of gathering the pieces, finding the weapons, and killing the bad guy instead of having to wait in a dungeon to be rescued by a boy who fixed the weapon she broke instead of using?

It could have, but it wasn't. Your question here is pointless. It is the same nit-picking that asks why the death star couldn't just blow up the moon then the planet the rebel base was on right afterwards. Any excuse given is merely narrative plot convenience in order to justify the story and game. She started with all the tools to stop him but because of narrative convenience (Link is the hero of time), could not use them. This justifies the game and is a lampshade of the obvious plot hole.

Yes a game could have been made where the items were hidden already, but it wasn't. That would have been a different game then the creators wanted and so far the only justification for why they should have is because they didn't make the game you wanted or in the way you wanted. Sorry, but that will happen from time to time. Just because every book or story out there can be written in a different way doesn't mean they should nor does it invalidate them because they don't.

And does a piss-poor job of it, too, because she made less impact in seven years of fighting Ganon than Link did in roughly two weeks. It's arguable that this is unfair of me to observe, what with Link being the fated hero with the magical MacGuffin sword and all, but again, Link's status as plot-driven hero is a completely arbitrary decision. Why couldn't Zelda be the fated hero? What's stopping the writers from giving her the MacGuffin Sword?

Again, because it was the creator's story and they wanted link to be the hero, not zelda. It is not sexist, it does not invalidate the story or game, it was just creator choice. Granted the choice may have been influenced by cultural expectation or general market research that showed male protagonists were better received then female ones, but the product itself lacks a bias if all you are using is itself. Otherwise one could apply that logic to everything, where every story with a male protagonist is sexist. The story simply is at the moment, until you can demonstrate a discrimination (not to be confused with a pattern) against women or a bias inherent in the game itself.

I've never played that game and never will, but does Krystal ever accomplish anything Fox doesn't, aside from getting trapped inside a rock?

You are confusing SF Adventure with SF Assault. The first is the one where she is in the crystal, the second is one where she is inexplicably skilled enough to be a fighter jet pilot after what I can only imagine as a fraction of the time and training the rest of SF team has had. Hell, even if she is only better then Slippy (worst pilot) after far less practice, that alone shows character ability and skill.

A character has a name. That a game can be played by a woman doesn't mean the character is female. The only character in those game exists in the player's mind, and that's useless to talk about, since she's talking about the industry, not the players.

She also mentions how games affect the players by referring to how media portrayal can affect them (with the assumption that in order to get the game media influence, one has to play the game in the first place). An idea full of holes but not getting on that now, too tied with the violence and school shooting logic.

Again, those are probably coming up in future videos. At a guess, I'll say "Voodoo Priestess/Tribal Sorceress" and/or "Man with Boobs."

isn't "man with boobs" the general idea that a female character was merely a character that received barebones female characteristics to make them female without any sort of characterization or reason why the character would be female nor any consequence or relevance to plot about said gender? Doesn't that describe huge swaths of male gaming characters too? Characters who's gender means nothing in the story nor is referenced in game or has repercussions/benefits in the game world. Does mario being male affect the games in the least? Does link being male affect the story or plots in the least? Could not both of them be replaced with genderless golems and nothing else change in the games? Are they not genderless, merely in a male "costume" so to speak, rather then truly a male character? More modern games, with deeper stories can be said to have gendered characters, true, but the simpler damsel stories often make no emphasis on the gender of characters in the least and are done, probably often solely, based on market research of what patterns are better received. Games sell more with protagonist who looks male (as opposed to a character who's gender actually influences the game or story.) And regardless if that is a sell fulfilling prophesy of sorts (as I think) or not, patterns will be followed for profit, without discrimination or bias but rather simple pattern.

 

[JimB]

I do hope you don't take this too rudely, not meaning to be uncivil though I know I can and do come off as such.

Nah, I think you did fine.

I find that a terrible, terrible notion. Aside from the general worthlessness of generalizations in any form of research, I can get a very strong racist/sexist justification vibe coming from it, which is odd given your stance to the contrary.

Generalization is impossible to avoid when you're talking about any kind of society rather than the individuals composing it. If you're going to ignore individuality to treat a group as a homogenous being that possesses traits, then the only judgment we can make is whether those statements are true about more of the population than they're untrue of.

It could have, but it wasn't.

Yeah, I know it could have. I asked why it wasn't.

That would have been a different game then the creators wanted and so far the only justification for why they should have is because they didn't make the game you wanted or in the way you wanted.

Well, my preferences and Ms. Sarkeesian's point of how often women are relegated to damsel in distress.

Again, because it was the creator's story and they wanted Link to be the hero, not Zelda.

That doesn't really answer the question. Why did they want him to be the hero rather than Zelda? What specific train of thought led them to the decision to have one male character and one female, one of whom would fight the monsters and gain the powers and save the world, the other of whom would do nothing but dispense largely useless advice and get captured inside a giant rupee; how did they come to the decision that the female character would be the useless one? Why was that even a necessary choice to make?

Otherwise one could apply that logic to everything, where every story with a male protagonist is sexist.

Sexism is determined by context and by motivation behind actions. That a protagonist is male is not proof in and of itself that the writer thinks women are damsels. That's an accusation that becomes more valid when the game makes the titular female character a damsel.

The first is the one where she is in the crystal; the second is one where she is inexplicably skilled enough to be a fighter jet pilot after what I can only imagine as a fraction of the time and training the rest of SF team has had.

Ah. If you say so. As I've said, I never have played those games, and likely never will.

She also mentions how games affect the players by referring to how media portrayal can affect them (with the assumption that in order to get the game media influence, one has to play the game in the first place). An idea full of holes but not getting on that now, too tied with the violence and school shooting logic.

The question is one of defaults. White, straight man is a default in America, to the point where unless someone takes pains to point out where he deviates ("A man and his son are in a car wreck; the man dies; the boy's doctor says, 'I can't operate on him, he's my son'"), the unspoken presumption is he's a white, straight man. Hell, we even assume Jesus was a white, straight man despite him having been born in the Middle frigging East, where some variety of brown seems much more plausible than white.

Isn't "man with boobs" the general idea that a female character was merely a character that received barebones female characteristics to make them female without any sort of characterization or reason why the character would be female nor any consequence or relevance to plot about said gender?

No idea. I'm not very good with the jargon of feminism. My best yet still admittedly shaky understanding is that a man with boobs is a character who seems male because of how much she wants everyone to know she's a woman, but I could be way off.

Does Mario being male affect the games in the least? Does Link being male affect the story or plots in the least?

Are they both still trying to save princesses they make out with?

Are they not genderless, merely in a male "costume" so to speak, rather then truly a male character?

I've argued in the past that they're not characters, yes, but they are intended to project male-ness.