The core problem with Tropes vs Women in Video Games

[Entitled]

Sometimes it's a strawman, sometimes there are clear implications that it isn't.
For example, in "Tropes Vs Women Damsels in Distress Part 1" Anita for most of the video, appears to be criticisng the frequence of use of the DID trope.
However at one point she refers to a single incidence of the trope as "regressive crap." Which gives the clear implication that the trope is inherently bad, inherently regressive, inherently crap. And when you bear that in mind it's not out of line to suspect she might want it to stop existing altogether, even if she doesn't outright say she does.

Following that logic, you are just as likely to censor Anita, by implying that she shouldn't have called that trope "regressive crap".

If anything, you are MORE likely to be a censor wannabe, after all you have also implied thatin your imagination, not wanting something to exist is the same the same thing as wanting to censor it. While Anita has made no such sign.

Criticizing other people's speech is not censorship, it's speech itself.

Being concerned about something being called "regressive crap" is not just the sign of an extremely thin skin, but also of hypocricy, after all, you are literally criticizing and scare-quoting the words that someone else said as a sign of censorship to be concerend about, while even those words themselves applied to displeasure about a general cultural attitude, rather than feeling threatened by a specific speech's existence.

 

[Breakdown]

I'd say that the core problem with Tropes vs Women in Video Games is a total lack of context.

You don't know the context in which Anita is approaching her examples, is she a gamer? Did she play the game? Did she enjoy it? How did she react to the example she used? Have you approached other players to discuss their reaction?

She doesn't provide a description of the full game and explain how the example she uses fits in that context. So you can murder female characters? Is there any punishment for that? Can you murder male characters as well? How are the two genders treated differently?

She doesn't consider a wider cultural context? You've provided a list of Japanese games that portray negative female stereotypes? Maybe it's worth discussing a possible trend in Japanese culture in general?

 

[IceForce]

The "core problem" is that she uses snippets of game footage that are, at best, taken completely out of context, and at worst, completely misrepresent the game they're taken from.

She then uses this footage to confirm her already-present bias.

 

[endtherapture]

What annoys me about Anita is that people say her cherry picking her examples and presenting them out of context like it's some kind of meaningful analysis. Especially when she analyses old games like Mario, like a 20 year old game is somehow relevant to the state of the industry now.

Also she does not promote any discussion or solution to the problem, simply showing lists of her evidence basically. She doesn't go into any development process, any solution or any context to as to why there is a problem.

Her supporters also deal in vague arguments like "this is a massive problem" and do not the discuss the issue. I'm sorry but plenty of games are not sexist, in fact probably a majority of games. Go and play them. Plenty of films, books, TV shows have similar "problems" to videogames but no one dismisses the film, literature or television industry as sexist or damaging.

 

[Guy from the 80's]

The problem with Tropes vs Women is Anita Sarkeesian, shes awful at delivery and shes not very good. There are many things in gaming that can be improved, there is room for a lot more diversity thats for sure. The problem however is that its feminists and their crazy theories that are at the helm, and useful fools among the gaming industry is helping them. Instead of taking a critical look, they just see woman shouting wolf and write tedious articles on how this brave women are fighting this imaginary horde of gaming mysogonists.

I would be happy to donate to "the cause" if dishonest liars like Anita Sarkeesian werent a part of it.

 

[small]

he videos seem to be aimed at people who arent that familiar with gaming and have only a passing knowledge of feminist theory. basically a beginners guide to feminist theory in gaming.

personally while i dont agree with everything she says but there is an issue with females, etc being set dressing for the most part and her videos give me some things to think about.

 

[Phasmal]

Okay, well presumably all the ladies (and guys!) who do want greater representation and are gamers do play games for fun. I know I do.

I think the problem is that people laser focus on this one woman who is saying very basic boring things and act like that's the entire `diversity in games` movement. When it's not even close.

And the other problem is people just put it under a broad title of `feminists`- do all gamers speak for you? Does every random gamer?

Fuck it, I was having these arguments before any of you knew who Anita WAS.

Spoiler: Hipster rage

 

[Guerilla]

The problem is very simple. Feminist pseudoanalysis and pseudoscience always have the conclusions before even analyzing or experimenting. They experiment/analyze something in order to reach the conclusion they want to, they don't reach conclusions after experimenting/analyzing. This is how they're currently ruining social sciences too.

If I try hard enough and twist and spin innocent tidbits about games I'll find misandry in every damn videogame on the planet. What, the princess in Mario always ends up safe while the hateful developer keeps killing without mercy all the male protagonists? This is obviously a result of the violent culture that exists against men in society and the videogame community. Damn you Miyamoto!

 

[San Martin]

I like Tropes vs Women. It's not ground-breaking or very academic, however I don't think it is it trying to be. Anita isn't perfect and her arguments can be criticised, but she does not deserve even a portion of the bile she receives, including some of what's been said on this very thread.

 

[funnydude6556]

Personally I think despite the way she comes off Anita Sarkeesian has her heart in the right place, I don't think she wants to attack anything but point out what seems like blatant sexism in certain fields of Entertainment. I don't think the videos serve to punish these people for making the wrong choices or for presenting women in a certain way but just asking them "Don't you think there might be something inherently sexist about this and the way it's presented?" I think she goes about this the wrong way sometimes as well and that the choices Anita picks may be wrong as she has a knack to get the wrong impression but again I don't think it's out of spite.

Regardless of whether she is though the threats are just out of line. The response shows that even if the games industry isn't sexist that there are certain people in the gaming community who have a very vile reaction to the idea of anyone questioning gaming. Even if Anita is wrong, even if every video she makes is off base, you can just ignore her. I mean the kind of people who are loyal enough to watch every video most likely already had a pretty negative attitude towards the games industry in the first place (PROBABLY. I'm not trying to paint off all Anita's loyal fans under the same brush) Simple put

1. Don't you think just by dismissing her, we're ignoring the opportunity to discuss whether we have a problem with diversity in gaming
2. The threats are uncalled for regardless of what you think of Anita

and my final point to everyone. Regardless of what side you're on I want to say. How on earth do we know when we have equal diversity in gaming? No scratch that how do we know when we have it in Entertainment? The way certain people talk you'd think it was a quota that creators have to reach "Sorry Joss Whedon, we've met the quota for geeky male characters who make pop culture references, now you have to make 4 female characters to proceed!" I'm sorry but we can't embrace creative freedom and have 100% equality in terms of representation. It can never be a dead 50/50 in terms of character design. Ok it should be better then it is at the moment but sometimes I get the impression that some people want it to be a literal case of equality where there's the same amount of characters on both sides.

 

[Silvanus]

Well, the subject of my original post was about what I view as the core weakness of Tropes as video game criticism, divorced from the current rancor and politics . However, since you've asked, I think forbidding discussion of a subject is censorship.In fact, that is the dictionary definition of censorship. This website isn't banning discussions of a certain person who name starts with a Z (which, by the way, this thread is not really about) but many sites were and some still are. You might approve of the censorship, you may think that this censorship is or was necessary, but at least own up to it. There have been lots and lots of people supporting censorship lately. And many people - including developers, journalists and gamers - have applauded it. And many of those people are the ones now calling for wholesale reforms in the video game industry and video gaming culture. And I personally haven't seen anyone who applauded the initial shutting down of any discussion of that subject come out and say "well, I still think there is nothing to this business but shutting down an open and frank discussion was the wrong thing to do in retrospect." Not a single person. Why should I believe their initial impulse toward stifling dissent has changed? I'm sure they believe it was all done for the greater good.

Right, so we're talking specifically about websites regulating the subjects that can be discussed. Of course, the majority of forums do this to greater or lesser extents. These forums are private entities (and relatively small ones); would you really dispute their right to moderate?

Also, I wrote directly in response to what you said about "ban[ning] all adolescent titillation from video games", not regulating forum content. The point stands that nobody is calling to do that.

Sometimes it's a strawman, sometimes there are clear implications that it isn't.
For example, in "Tropes Vs Women Damsels in Distress Part 1" Anita for most of the video, appears to be criticisng the frequence of use of the DID trope.
However at one point she refers to a single incidence of the trope as "regressive crap." Which gives the clear implication that the trope is inherently bad, inherently regressive, inherently crap. And when you bear that in mind it's not out of line to suspect she might want it to stop existing altogether, even if she doesn't outright say she does.
If certain things a political figure does implies that their beliefs are more extreme than they say they are, you have every right to be concerned.

No, that doesn't follow at all. Almost everybody respects freedom of thought while simultaneously disliking certain lines of thought.

You've made a massive leap. It's a fairly moderately-sized assumption to say that if somebody criticises something they therefore want it to stop existing, but it's a colossal assumption to say they must want it banned. By that token, criticising anything means wanting it banned.

 

[WonkyWarmaiden]

I think that everyone that's angry at or about Anita Sarkeesian should take a step back, realize that everything she's saying is her own opinion and that she isn't going to censor your favorite games with her 'feminist ways'. Just ignore her vids if you don't wanna hear her opinion. She has the right to say her piece but you don't have to listen if you don't like it. I don't really care for her videos and that's how I deal with the problem. Just don't be an ass about it.

I mean look, I consider myself a feminist because of the bullshit roles our society forces men and women into, so when I see the same tired cliche of gruff muscled dude or simpering damsel in distress in yet another game I sigh and think about how much more interesting and dynamic the characters could have been if the game makers put even an ounce more of creative thought into the character design. And I know that everybody goes on and on about artistic integrity but come on, nine times out of ten it's just plain laziness of the game studios and if not that then they're just plain scared of doing anything interesting in an industry that has been stagnating for years now.

 

[Guerilla]

I like Tropes vs Women. It's not ground-breaking or very academic, however I don't think it is it trying to be. Anita isn't perfect and her arguments can be criticised, but she does not deserve even a portion of the bile she receives, including some of what's been said on this very thread.

The reason why there's so much bile is a common one. People hate self-righteous assholes who make profit from pretending to be a moral authority judging everyone else from their pedestal while ripping off their gullible followers. It's the same reason people despise douchebags like Pat Robertson who have made millions from selling morality and religion.

 

[Thyunda]

Anita Sarkeesian is nobody to me. I do not respect her opinion any more than I respect the user's above me - I don't know the user above me and I don't know Anita Sarkeesian. She can make videos and say whatever she wants, but ultimately, if her research is poor, her results will be poor. Look what happened when Jack Thompson took his beliefs to their logical conclusion - disbarment and humiliation. Sarkeesian is only as powerful as the sum total of the harassment she receives.

If you are in somebody's house and you open a box, and they watch you without much interest, you can be pretty sure there's nothing incriminating in the box. If they leap on you and force the box shut before you can see inside, they have something to hide. Maybe it's not your business, but if you were a police detective, the fact they have something to hide is pretty damning already.

In this context, if you permit Sarkeesian to have her opinion, it can be examined and either accepted or debunked. If you get angry...why are you angry? Is there something you're not capable of defending? Something you'd rather not see the light of day? Well now I see a problem.

Is sexism a problem in games? Sexism's a problem in all media, games are not unique in this. It also doesn't justify it. How many American films star exceedingly thin women in apparent 'normal suburban housewife' roles? A lot. Unrealistic portrayal of women is a common thing and that is not good. Defending it is...well it's pointless, if I'm honest. For all our cries of 'artistic integrity', 'creative freedom' and 'down with evil publishers', we are so quick to attack anybody who criticises the decisions that were likely made by the marketing department.

How many of us point out when there's a grossly sexist part of a game? Answer - practically all of us. None of us think X-Blade or whatever it was called had a well-dressed protagonist, yet when the game is singled out and attacked, a large amount of gamers will leap to its defence on the basis that 'they' have no right to criticise 'our' property.

What I'm trying to say here is that the problem with Anita Sarkeesian is that she's a poor academic. Her evidence is patchy but her point is very real. A competent journalist could create a damning portfolio with that kind of determination, and rather than allow her to fail on her own terms, an enormous amount of people were just too eager to stick their oar in, to announce to the world that digging too deep is a dangerous habit.

That snitches get stitches.

 

[Ishigami]

No OP I don?t think that this is the core issue.
The core issue is pretty simple: Anita Sarkeesian intentionally ignores any context or other sounding argument in order to present any given situation as she wants.
For example in Damsel in Distress she presented Double Dragon as ?regressive crap? ignoring that this was an arcade game and as such has mere seconds to establish a plot or that the target audience were male teenagers. The Damsel in Distress was not at all about disempowering women and all about getting male teenager engaged and that as quickly as possible.
I?m pretty sure nothing would have embodied ?I love her? more than Billy and Jimmy saying: ?Hey Marian is a strong independent women I bet she can help herself just fine and there is nothing to worrying about, let?s get back into the garage.? ? Game Over.
This misrepresentation and one sided point of view is what pisses people off and rightly I say.
And that is the core issue.

Quite some time back I think someone wanted to kickstart a documentation about the positive aspects of furries or bronies I think. (Can?t remember)
The proclaimed goal was to create a series of short documentation videos displaying the furry/bronie fandom in a positive light.
I don?t know what happened to the project and I don?t really care but the goal was enlightening and are valid for TvW as well: As it was set to present something in a certain light all objectivity was lost.
And that is what Anita Sarkeesian does. She set out to display games as misogynistic as possible so the result is exactly that.
People searching for good points about her videos are hilarious. Should try that with Jack Thomson as well.