The Most Dangerous Woman in Videogames - Anita Sarkeesian

[wulf3n]

Sure, there's gaps in service in genre universally, but I'm seeing people give more care to fixing those than female character representation. Honestly, I see those gaps as far easier to bridge, too. Especially on PC.
I mean I'm of the mind that it'll be damn near impossible to fix the gender issues with one game, but one tactical squad based strategy game, and people are suddenly rethinking everything! X-Com's practically fixed the issue of lacking such games on console. It's getting a sequel/addon and no doubt there'll be more in the future to fill the niche.

Are they though? I know X-Com is getting a sequel but are there any other publishers besides 2K that care?

Did you know there's a small facebook group actively trying to stop Zelda from getting her own game? And that in the comments sections where the notion is talked about, there's people actively against the idea?

I did not. I wonder if Nintendo do?

I'm not saying this has any sort of momentum, but, well, I'm not seeing any plans for a game where you play as Zelda either. Hard to say who's winning... wait, no it's not, they are until there is a game where you play as Zelda.
Not sure if the gaming community itself counts as outside forces, though.

Kind of like the bear repellent rock?

And there's that logic defying idea that the industry doesn't want to cater to people who want to play as women, and make more money as they spend more money. People generally want more money. It's why people mimic CoD, isn't it? To get that money?

Yep.

Honestly, I think there are those in the industry that want to, but are getting blocked by the whole notion that games where you play as a woman will be a mistake.

The joys of capitalism. Until the current publisher / developer model dissolves or a game with a female protagonist is a smash hit, it's probably not going to change.

 

[Tono Makt]

I'm just going to say that I disagree that she's doing more good than harm. The lack of diversity in female characters was something talked about. It just wasn't some huge polarizing issue. I feel like she's poisoned the well, and that what could be discussion of the issue and those surrounding it has mostly become two circlejerks attacking each other.

Sort of agreeing with you here. On one hand she is bringing attention to an aspect of video games that a large number of gamers would prefer to ignore - the representation of Females in video games. On the other hand, she's doing it in a way that is more and more suspect, which makes it distressingly easy to dismiss both her and her argument. "Well, if you have to exaggerate, outright lie and omit so many different counter-examples, then you ignore any respectful criticism, that means your argument must be flawed and unable to stand on its own merits. Ergo, there isn't a problem with the representation of Females in video games! Taa!"

Which sucks, because I'd love to play a game like Mass Effect or Skyrim where the main character was designed to be female, and there was more female-resonant game play. Something with a massive budget, a huge world (sandbox or no), a complex and detailed story and world, but where when I'm playing it, I'm not thinking "I'm just a dude in this game who happens to have bewbs when he changes the views." People like Sarkeesian may be hurting that rather than helping it.

A nice rebuttal/addition to the Damsel In Distress video is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvJ7KQFVoms . (I like how he mentioned just how many "Monkey" movies there were in the 20 years leading up to Donkey Kong. It annoyed me when Sarkeesian went right from King Kong to Donkey Kong and skipping everything between, though I never cared enough to try to figure out why. Apparently it bothered this guy too, but he actually cared enough to research it and come up with an answer, which explains why it bothered me too.)

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

No, you guys have been far more focused on the whole fraud thing (I refuse to watch the videos because I'm almost certain I will hate them with a burning passion and quit like a minute in). And a derail about cherry picking. And BreakfastMan's stuff. And the whole fucking thing about sources, who seriously gives a fuck? Maybe it's just because I haven't watched her videos, but I'm betting the core segments of her argument are not totally reliant on some statistic she may or may not have pulled out of her ass. That has been most of the thread.

Hmm.

So.

For those who are keeping score at home, Revnak has neither watched a single video of Anita's dissenters NOR ANITA'S VIDEOS THEMSELVES....yet he's the one coming in to this thread telling US to "grow the fuck up" while he's over here making "bets" about videos he has not seen. While cursing up on doozy of a storm allllll on his own.

Sooooooo what exactly are you doing in this thread again?

Other than talking about how much it sucks? I came here maybe wanting to talk about the article or sexism in gaming. I know lots about that.

And I suppose I should apologize about the cursing. Just the way I entertain myself. If it offends you or you assume I'm getting pissed, my bad.

If you consider this civil then I'm seriously starting to wonder why people think R&P is flamewar city. This is far from civil.

We may be being less than nice to Anita, but as far as being overly harsh to fellow posters, it's been at a fair minimum. The word you're looking for is "impassioned", because topics like this (and people like her) bring out strong emotions. But needless flame wars this thread is not. Not yet at least.

So you can stop trying so hard to make it one with the finger-pointing, mkay? Mkay.

I DO NOT CARE IF YOU ARE MEAN TO ANITA. I SERIOUSLY DON'T. Okay. Now, you baiting breakfastman along, that was not civil. The people going after Bara no Hime, that was not civil. Breakfeastman being Breakfeastman (as much as I may agree with them on multiple issues) was not civil. The all-encompassing air of smugness and righteous indignation, that is not civil.

So yeah, Revnak. Pick a discussion and hop on in with relevant two cents, amigo ^_^

I did... in another thread. This one sucks. That one kinda does too, but whatever.

Then deuces. Adios. Au revoir. Hey Ben Cya. All that jazz...[/quote]

Then why did you quote me? And ask me questions? And bait me with the first half of this? I mean, I'll keep replying to you and reading this, but I don't think I'm gonna get much real discussion, just waste some not all that valuable time. I'm pretty certain I won't get much out of the other thread either, considering it is an offshoot of this one.

Edit: He got suspended for that? lolwut? I'm pretty certain if that's bad enough to get a suspension I should have at least gotten a warning for calling him smug.

 

[QuantumWalker]

-Super snip-

I'll just post your responses and anyone else who wants to see what I said can click the link above.

It isn't depictions of sexism in video games that are the problem. It is sexist themes and ideas that the games perpetuate. And sexism is just an idea. Being sexist does not require someone to act on their sexist ideas, just like how one can be racist without lynching a black man, or transphobic without beating a transwoman to death.

According to Anita the constant portrayal of "sexist" themes in video games is directly caused by the industry being unwilling to include women. She also says that these themes can potentially affect how gamers treat women in real life. I've posted a number of her quotes stating just that. Whether you feel that someone can be have a specific mindset and not act on it is for you to believe. But if someone is racist they will treat some people differently. You don't have to kill or beat someone to prove that. And people who are transphobic do act on that idea. Ideas lead to action, whatever form that action may take.

And how does this [properly citing sources] apply to the video series, exactly?

Again, Anita is marketing this series as an Academic work. One of the major tenants of Academia is giving credit to those whose ideas and findings you use when creating your own. In regards to plagiarism you have several reasons why this matters.
- Anita is using footage she did not record herself. She should be crediting the videos she uses if she didn't record them herself.
- Some of the statistics and figures she uses were not collected by her so she needs to credit the organizations that did the research for her.
- She makes statements about the history game development that clearly had to be researched. What sources did she use and are they credible and that her quotes are accurate.

Why should she have to explain commonly understood terms like rape culture to her audience? We don't expect scientists to explain or cite the theory of gravity or evolution, so why is it expected of her?

Because she is marketing these videos to a crowd of people that may not know what these concepts are. She announced her intention to remove feminism from academic head spaces and bring it to the YouTube audience. This means that she should not be making any assumptions about what her audience does and does not know regarding feminism. I'm not saying she has to define every term, but if it is relevant to the discussion and important that people understand the concept she should make an effort to inform her audience and minimize confusion.

For your analogy, if a scientist makes a presentation at a symposium it is expected that everyone there will understand the basics of that is being said. That is not the case with these videos.

I really don't see a problem here? The backlash against her was shocking and horrible. Why does she have to only talk about her video series and keep quiet on the harassment?

You seem to have missed my point, I never said she had to talk exclusively about her project. She used all of her major media outgoings to focus only on the harassment she received. She made no attempt to talk about the merits of her project, expound why she chose the topics she did, talk about her research methods, anything.

But she capitalized on her victim hood in order to get more publicity and used that as a justification for her project rather than the merit of the topics she planned to cover. Likewise she has used the harassment she received as a justification for generalizing anybody who has criticisms against her as haters, trolls, or misogynists.

I don't how she is wrong here? She is focusing on the trope and how it effects portrayal of characters. What does it matter if it was explained why the damsel was kidnapped? It is still an example of the trope. Inclusion of something doesn't automatically become less silly or stupid because the writers found a way to explain it in the context of the narrative. In Halloween 2, for instance, it is revealed that the survivor is Michael Meyer's long lost sister. The writers explain that within the context of the narrative, but it is still a stupid twist as it lessens the impact of the first movie.

Because without context we are left with only the scene and no other factors. Are all damsels the same? Are they all weak, dis-empowered, objectified women with no agency? Is their nothing to differentiate the circumstances of one damsel's capture from another?

By eschewing context Anita has reduced every damsel to the same flat descriptor when some characters are more than that. Princess Zelda in Twilight Princess spends the majority of the game imprisoned by Zant, but she made the choice to stand down in order to protect her citizens. In the same game Midna is rendered unconscious and weakened by Zant for a brief sequence of the game which link has to play though. Midna is crucial to the game play and story of the game and the fact that she was damsel'd for one sequence does not take away from her at all.

As for the explanation for these events being stupid and taking away from previous titles. So what? By that logic the prevalence and cliche nature of the Damsel in Distress trope in this day and age should lessen the impact of the trope. Being a tired trope is a good thing because it means people roll their eyes at it rather than glamorize it.

I honestly don't see why the business decisions around a change made in a game matters when looking at the change. KOTOR 2 still has a crap ending. Knowing the fact that it was rushed to meet the release date doesn't change that. Since I am not a huge expert on the history of the development of a game that is universally mocked, not going to debate on the other parts.

But video games are a business as much as they are an artistic endeavor. When deadlines loom over a project content gets altered or cut. When a project changes developers, content gets altered. When games are published by different publishers on different consoles they may get different content.

Look at Laura Croft through the ages. In her inception she was a hyper sexualized female character, but once different studios took over the design and different companies funded the projects you can see them creating their own take on the character. This culminated in the most recent iteration of Laura Croft which was designed to be a reboot of the character and is made to be a more realized and less sexualized character.

And for your argument about quality of a game. It doesn't matter when talking about the prevalence of narrative tropes. So what if kotor 2 had a bad ending, so what if Starfox adventure wasn't as well received. when we are comparing the cultural impact of a trope wound within a game whether the game was good or bad doesn't matter.

I don't see how this is bad? I mean, she is entirely right. There is a problem with sexism, especially in the tech industry. The same with the film industry. Or the fiction industry. We live in a sexist society. I don't see how acknowledging that is bad.

I'm not saying that their isn't a problem with sexism. But Anita is not entirely right about where the problem of sexism is.

 

[Rebel_Raven]

snip.

Yeah, agree to disagree works with me as far as the enjoyment of NPCs.

There's a lot of leadership methods, but my point is sooner or later, after, maybe weeks of being the healer, you're going to say "you know what? I'd like to try something else? can I make an Alt?" And when it happens. You see women stuck as mage, archer, healer, and basically zero options to get up close and personal, and smash enemies.
Then you look at the guy's side, and see they have all the options you do, and then some. That's how it feels like to me in the big picture of gaming.
I mean really, until Saints Row 4 came along, or DCUO, I guess, I pretty much game up on the idea of prototype/infamous/crackdown where I could play as a woman. I mean if a woman can't be super powered, then what hte hell, game industry?
Honestly, DCUO, and Saints Row IV are still in that "select a gender even though it barely matters" area. Yet I look great in those games so it kinda makes up for it some. And I have fun as a female avatar, so that's nice, too. The games aren't perfect, but they filled a niche.

Yes, you do have a point about Bioshock lacking any reoccuring protagonist. Still, that doesn't help much in the face of them having exclusively male protagonists. I mean, sure an NPC can be loved, and adored, but more often than not it's the character you play as that gets that honor.
I do think Clem, one of my favorite NPCs will be the main character in the next season of walking dead, and I'm pretty happy about it, but the game's not out yet. There's just something about her design that resonates with me like crazy.

Alright, you got me with a lot of your examples about women getting sequels. I was thinking a bit too recently. And even then, There's that hunger games trilogy.

Gotta wonder, though, why aren't we getting a hunger games game? I mean granted, movie to game games generally suck, but it's weird there's no real attempt to cash in aside from an IOS game. Bows are the hottest trend in gaming these days, and it's like the main weapon in the movie, yet... nothing. I could prolly write it off as the artist wanting ot protect the property from a crappy game, but ... I dunno.
I can't say I saw the movie, honestly. Would it not lend well to a game?

Yeah, I agree, shallow ass kickers get forgotten faster than well thought out ones, but instant gratification works wonders sometimes. Waiting for the perfect female protagonist... well, it's folly, IMO, because if we get -1- good female protagonist, she'll be criticized to no end because we only have -1- female protagonist to talk about.
I mean, if we got a game about Martin Luthor King Jr. and just that one game, there'll probably be people wanting a game about Malcom X, or Rosa Parks. One character won't satisfy the masses, pretty much is what I'm saying.
2 characters won't really work either, IMO. We're gunna need like... 5 I'd say to diversify opinions enough, provided these women are actually decently well known, and different enough so they don't all get swatted with the same criticisms.

 

[mrblakemiller]

I can't speak for others, but I found the whole raising that much money thing for the videos that were put out (very slowly I might add) a bit shady. I mean, I can't remember what the initial goal was, but per the Kickstarter page still up, she's raised >$150,000 to make youtube videos in what looks like a spare room in her house, on top of the fact that she already had a fairly trafficked youtube channel (again, IIRC). To me, it felt like someone saying they want to create a small homeless shelter, but in order to do so, they absolutely need to raise 650,000,000 USD, before they'll get started, despite the fact that they've already been running soup kitchens.

She asked for 6,000. She got 160,000 because ass holes from all over the internet swarmed on her like killer bees which martyred her and made her famous.

Yes, they tried to strike her down and all it did was make her more powerful than they could possibly imagine.

She never asked for 160,000. That's just what people gave her because she was receiving death and rape threats. Say what you want about her videos now. But at that time no one knew who the hell she was so those death and rape threats had nothing to do with whether or not she was right or wrong, but ENTIRELY because people wanted her to shut her stupid female jew mouth and stop "ruining video games" for us straight, white, males.

Sadly, small inconvenient facts like that her foul mouthed attackers were the ones that made her that fortune doesn't stop them from accusing her of getting that much intentionally. Because to realize their own fault would require self awareness and, I dare say, logic beyond that of screeching monkey and they're just not capable of it.

Thank you thank you thank you. It absolutely astounds me that you can say what you've said, and I assume people have said that many times already, and certain people on the Net can still shout, "She got too much money!"

Honestly, her most recent work has a lot of polish to it. I disagree with her fundamental assertion that there simply HAS to be X amount of equality in a medium like video games, but I respect her right to argue for the world she wants. (If anyone cares, I'm a mostly-conservative capitalist who thinks no manufacturer owes potential buyers anything and that people get what they're willing to pay for. People want more women-centric comic books, but no matter many times Marvel relaunches She-Hulk, there's never enough people buying it to make it make fiscal sense. Ergo, no She-Hulk book.)

If you really want fodder for disliking Anita's opinions, go watch the videos she made previous to the hooplah. She made a video counting down the "Five Creepiest Christmas Songs" that not only got mad at Mariah Carey for singing one three-minute song about how "All I Want For Christmas Is You" (i.e. a man), but also got mad at a much older song for speaking of stereotypically-gendered toys for a boy and a girl in the lyrics (and the footage for the song she showed was in black and freaking white). She railed against female movie villians who used their sexuality as weapons and ended her video by saying, "Hollywood, I'm okay with you occasionally using women as villians..." as if everyone's supposed to know that males are naturally more villianous and a female antagonist only makes sense as a rare exception. She even argued in a throwaway comment in one of her videos that Christianity is inherently misogynistic because God told Mary she would bear the son of God and be his earthly mother (which, if you read the book, Mary is really, really, happy to hear). Ultimately, I can't see her idea of feminism as anything other than, "Women should never lose any agency, be on the sort end of the stick, be acted upon, or otherwise 'lose' in any pop culture."

 

[Rebel_Raven]

Sure, there's gaps in service in genre universally, but I'm seeing people give more care to fixing those than female character representation. Honestly, I see those gaps as far easier to bridge, too. Especially on PC.
I mean I'm of the mind that it'll be damn near impossible to fix the gender issues with one game, but one tactical squad based strategy game, and people are suddenly rethinking everything! X-Com's practically fixed the issue of lacking such games on console. It's getting a sequel/addon and no doubt there'll be more in the future to fill the niche.

Are they though? I know X-Com is getting a sequel but are there any other publishers besides 2K that care?

Did you know there's a small facebook group actively trying to stop Zelda from getting her own game? And that in the comments sections where the notion is talked about, there's people actively against the idea?

I did not. I wonder if Nintendo do?

I'm not saying this has any sort of momentum, but, well, I'm not seeing any plans for a game where you play as Zelda either. Hard to say who's winning... wait, no it's not, they are until there is a game where you play as Zelda.
Not sure if the gaming community itself counts as outside forces, though.

Kind of like the bear repellent rock?

And there's that logic defying idea that the industry doesn't want to cater to people who want to play as women, and make more money as they spend more money. People generally want more money. It's why people mimic CoD, isn't it? To get that money?

Yep.

Honestly, I think there are those in the industry that want to, but are getting blocked by the whole notion that games where you play as a woman will be a mistake.

The joys of capitalism. Until the current publisher / developer model dissolves or a game with a female protagonist is a smash hit, it's probably not going to change.

I'd like to think that the tactical turn based game's getting some kind of revival somehow. I mean, it just recently had it's big breakthrough. It needs time. But likely far less than 13 years which is where I peg the drought of games that prominently star women drying up.

As for Nintendo knowing if people are against Zelda getting her own game, I can't say I know, but I'd say it's likely they tried to contact nintendo about it. If nintendo heard, or cares, I can't say.
A quick google search brings up
http://www.zeldauniverse.net/zelda-news/aonuma-may-consider-princess-zelda-to-feature-in-her-own-game-if-people-have-strong-feelings-about-it/
and
http://www.zeldauniverse.net/zelda-news/numbers-rise-against-zelda-having-her-own-game/

No, not like bear repellant rock, but what I'm saying is until it happens, I don't believe it will. There's nothing even remotely solid about Zelda getting her own game. I don't know if peopel feel strongly enough about it, or if the people that feel strongly against it are countering them. It's an invisible war to me.
Frankly after being alienated from the gaming industry so long I can't help but be distrustful. I mean it's hard to remember the last time I felt like I got treated right by a game.

The industry wants money, but the money is already tied up... bring in new sources of money? I don't know if we disagree on this point or not. lol

A game with a female protagonsit having to become a smash hit is what scares me. I don't think there will be one any time soon unless it's like Blood Dragon in that it's cheap and good. But I'm not asking for a large slice of the gaming pie here. I just wanna not have to worry if we're getting a decent spread of female protagonist games across a year. Yeah, next year we're getting a few games with a female lead, but will we end up going a long part of the year without more? When's the next release?
I mean, it's pretty guarenteed that we're going to get a game that stars a guy next year, and we'll get many across the gaming year.
I just can't take getting female protagonists for granted. I see so few, and the genre they're in is kinda narrow. It bothers me a lot.
Nevermind the fact that games can just stop happening, and get put into limbo. Transistor could just not happen for some reason.

 

[Farther than stars]

No. That was the point of First Wave Feminism. We're now in the Third Wave of Feminism. Carry on.

Okay so tell me, what exactly are feminists fighting for if they aren't fighting for equality under the law?

EDIT: I should add, why does the rights of fictional characters matter more than actual women and the fight to maintain that equality under the law?

OK, so First Wave Feminism was about equality under the law. The Second Wave was more about social stuff, like making divorces societally acceptable. Then the Third Wave kind of branched out into dozens of different varieties and this is where feminists start to disagree about what feminism actually is. But the general line taken by most academic feminists is that not only the social (and legal) rights of women matter but also how women are socially perceived. That perception (like all perceptions) is partly brought about through stories and media representations.
Why does this matter to feminists? Well, I'll give you an example:

So technically all women are equal under the law in most Western democracies, as far as the workplace goes. They have the same right to practice any profession the same as men do and they have the right to earn the same as men do. But still they earn less, on average, than men do.
Why is this? Those same Western democracies are also capitalistic societies to some degree or another. And in a capitalist society, employees invariably bargain with their employers over their wages. And this is where most feminists see a problem. They would contend that because the media portrays women as being more demure, women (subconsciously) would then feel that they have to act this way during their job interview in order to get the job, because it means that they seem more "normal" (i.e. norm-conforming). Acting this way makes them less assertive, acting less assertive makes them worse at bargaining and thus they get lower pay, despite being equal under the law.
First Wave Feminism alternatives to this would be forcing the media to portray men and women equally by law, but this is seen as harshly totalitarian even by most feminists, so they tend to prefer the Third Wave approach to changing social stereotypes through dialogue and debate.
(Also, in this specific case, you could argue that women are less assertive by nature, i.e. through their biology, but if that's the case, you've got your Marxist Feminism to take up the fall, which contends that capitalism is rigged against women from the start.)
Anyway, those are the most useful things I can say about modern feminism. There's tonnes of other articles out there which could say far more intelligent things on the subject than I could, so if you're interested, you should take a look.

 

[wulf3n]

Sure, there's gaps in service in genre universally, but I'm seeing people give more care to fixing those than female character representation. Honestly, I see those gaps as far easier to bridge, too. Especially on PC.
I mean I'm of the mind that it'll be damn near impossible to fix the gender issues with one game, but one tactical squad based strategy game, and people are suddenly rethinking everything! X-Com's practically fixed the issue of lacking such games on console. It's getting a sequel/addon and no doubt there'll be more in the future to fill the niche.

Are they though? I know X-Com is getting a sequel but are there any other publishers besides 2K that care?

Did you know there's a small facebook group actively trying to stop Zelda from getting her own game? And that in the comments sections where the notion is talked about, there's people actively against the idea?

I did not. I wonder if Nintendo do?

I'm not saying this has any sort of momentum, but, well, I'm not seeing any plans for a game where you play as Zelda either. Hard to say who's winning... wait, no it's not, they are until there is a game where you play as Zelda.
Not sure if the gaming community itself counts as outside forces, though.

Kind of like the bear repellent rock?

And there's that logic defying idea that the industry doesn't want to cater to people who want to play as women, and make more money as they spend more money. People generally want more money. It's why people mimic CoD, isn't it? To get that money?

Yep.

Honestly, I think there are those in the industry that want to, but are getting blocked by the whole notion that games where you play as a woman will be a mistake.

The joys of capitalism. Until the current publisher / developer model dissolves or a game with a female protagonist is a smash hit, it's probably not going to change.

I'd like to think that the tactical turn based game's getting some kind of revival somehow. I mean, it just recently had it's big breakthrough. It needs time. But likely far less than 13 years which is where I peg the drought of games that prominently star women drying up.

As for Nintendo knowing if people are against Zelda getting her own game, I can't say I know, but I'd say it's likely they tried to contact nintendo about it. If nintendo heard, or cares, I can't say.
A quick google search brings up
http://www.zeldauniverse.net/zelda-news/aonuma-may-consider-princess-zelda-to-feature-in-her-own-game-if-people-have-strong-feelings-about-it/
and
http://www.zeldauniverse.net/zelda-news/numbers-rise-against-zelda-having-her-own-game/

No, not like bear repellant rock, but what I'm saying is until it happens, I don't believe it will. There's nothing even remotely solid about Zelda getting her own game. I don't know if peopel feel strongly enough about it, or if the people that feel strongly against it are countering them. It's an invisible war to me.
Frankly after being alienated from the gaming industry so long I can't help but be distrustful. I mean it's hard to remember the last time I felt like I got treated right by a game.

The industry wants money, but the money is already tied up... bring in new sources of money? I don't know if we disagree on this point or not. lol

A game with a female protagonsit having to become a smash hit is what scares me. I don't think there will be one any time soon unless it's like Blood Dragon in that it's cheap and good. But I'm not asking for a large slice of the gaming pie here. I just wanna not have to worry if we're getting a decent spread of female protagonist games across a year. Yeah, next year we're getting a few games with a female lead, but will we end up going a long part of the year without more? When's the next release?
I mean, it's pretty guarenteed that we're going to get a game that stars a guy next year, and we'll get many across the gaming year.
I just can't take getting female protagonists for granted. I see so few, and the genre they're in is kinda narrow. It bothers me a lot.
Nevermind the fact that games can just stop happening, and get put into limbo. Transistor could just not happen for some reason.

I agree that's it's a bad decision from a making money point of view, but feel that it's their choice to make. I just wish they'd hurry up and go bankrupt so we can move on from the AAA.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Until then she's just a booth babe with an agenda.

You were afraid to just say slut weren't you? Come on, just admit it. Or did you feel booth babe was more fitting considering that we're talking about video games? Really, this is exactly the kind of shit that got her famous in the first place. You are shooting yourself in the foot man.

 

[Worgen]

I haven't watched those specific vids but I have watched a few that claimed to refute her and they were full of shit. They only took the most superficial aspects of her argument or just went with what people thought she was saying and went with it, most of them looked like they were just fishing for page views. I'm not saying your links are full of shit, but for all I care they are. Since Anita isn't wrong about the portrayal of women and for the most part her vids are accurate, really the only leap in logic I could find in hers was when she brought up Ghost Trick. Although if I remember right the only time you had to save someone from getting killed was when it was a women, might be wrong about that, been awhile since I played it.

Yeah, not going to hound you about it. The first video I linked actually uses her own words, not specifically to debunk whatever she has to say about how women are depicted in video games, it even specifically says that it isn't the point, but it demonstrates that the the field in which she's risen to fame is one she actually doesn't really enjoy and didn't know a lot about to begin with. She says this, we see her saying this, there is video footage of it right there. Kind of smacks of the same things we got from people like Martha MacCallum claiming that Mass Effect was pornography, or every politician, parent, and anti-gun lobbyist that has ever attempted to link video games to mass shootings and other types of violence; they didn't play games, they didn't know much about games personally, they just drew sweeping conclusions based on assumption or they very plainly lied. In other words they didn't even know what they were talking about.

All personal feelings aside, one way or the other, in most cases like the topic of politics, religion, gun control, and racism, this is one where nobody is changing anyone's mind, people just become more entrenched when the issue, or in this case the woman emerges as the discussion.

For what it's worth I think any women's rights movements out there could probably do better than get angry about Mario recusing a princess, or other generic Macguffins. But what do I know?

The problem with the first video is that any video that's whole point is that "shes not a gamer so she cant talk about games" pretty much just shoots itself in the face. Assuming that she isn't a gamer, which is pretty much impossible nowadays since everyone plays games, that means that the person making that video can't talk about women's issues since they aren't a women (most likely).

I don't think shes trying to start a women's rights movement with her tropes vs women vids. I think she just wants women to be able to feel at home in games as much as men do. And right now, you will most likely see a women as some object to save instead of as a player character.

You've made it clear your mind is made up, I see that, but if you did watch the video you'd see she actually says this herself when referring to a project about video games;

"I'm not a fan of video games. I had to actually learn a lot about video games in the process of making this"

She also adds that she would like to play video games but is grossed out by the violence, which goes into the other two videos I linked earlier, about changing things to cater to new female gamers and ignoring that many are already out there perfectly happy with things as they are. I don't blame you for skipping them, the last one is pretty long, but it hammers the point in over and over again, there really isn't a problem with the industry, there are just problem people in it, though I would add that this can go for both sides..

The irony of her being put off by violent video games and insisting that games that are made a very specific way to cater to female gamers are sexist is not lost on me either.

"shes not a gamer so she cant talk about games" pretty much just shoots itself in the face

Which she herself actually points out. She admits she has practically no experience and hat to learn a lot in a very short time.

Like pretty much every politician that has ever come to link violent video games with crime, or as I referenced earlier, the Fox news report that claimed Mass Effect was pornographic, even though in both cases these claims were made by people that, just as Anita admitted herself (no, really, it's literally in the video) had little to no experience with video games at all.

Assuming that she isn't a gamer, which is pretty much impossible nowadays since everyone plays games

...but that's what she says herself. You don't have to guess or assume, no blanks to fill in, she is on camera saying this. Also, subjectively yes, I know a lot of people that know practically nothing about video games, so as assumptions go I think you've made an incorrect one about who's playing them on two counts.

Like I said earlier, I am not going to hound you about it. You seem completely uninterested in the other side other than to criticize it reactively, and have assumed a lot from the videos I linked without watching them. I think you're a pretty cool person, seen you around for years, so I certainly hope you do not take anything I've said as a personal attack against you, it isn't. I do however see that you're quick to assume an awful lot in Anita's favor and against her detractors. While we may or may not agree, the facts really are right there, straight from her her own mouth.

You're right, my mind is made up, I have yet to see the side against her offer any compelling evidence that shes wrong, pretty much all the angles of attack on her are personal. They all seem to come down to "ohhhhh shes not a real gamer." Video games are not a walled off garden, you don't have to have devoted yourself to them for a life time to understand them or to learn the tropes that are in them. I have spent a life time playing them and that is why I agree with her. The fact that other gamer's on this site agree with what she has to say kinda proves that shes not full of shit, Movie Bob obviously agrees and so does Jim Sterling, if you want some names.

 

[Ipsen]

Until then she's just a booth babe with an agenda.

You were afraid to just say slut weren't you? Come on, just admit it. Or did you feel booth babe was more fitting considering that we're talking about video games? Really, this is exactly the kind of shit that got her famous in the first place. You are shooting yourself in the foot man.

lel, that says more about you than me

But it says enough about you.

But really, his point stands. Your negativity towards Sarkeesian doesn't provide anything to an argument. It's nice to let your voice be heard (would help if you blatantly stated that too), but overall, if you're not helping the discussion, you're hurting it. A bit especially with the current state of this forum.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Until then she's just a booth babe with an agenda.

You were afraid to just say slut weren't you? Come on, just admit it. Or did you feel booth babe was more fitting considering that we're talking about video games? Really, this is exactly the kind of shit that got her famous in the first place. You are shooting yourself in the foot man.

lel, that says more about you than me

Yes, it definitely does say that I am the kind of person who thinks calling a woman a slut for taking a stance on video games is not good. And that I am intelligent enough to realize that shit like that will only make people pay more attention to what they say. Jennifer Heppler is a terrible writer, but thanks to all the hate she got her work now has some kind of legitimacy. This disappoints me.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

You've clearly not read up on the arguments against Anita. Do so, DangerousAnalysis is the best.

I don't care. I already know most of the things she'd probably point out and from what I've heard I wouldn't like the way she presents her videos anyway. For that same reason I really don't want to watch videos talking about what a terrible person she is. I just like to talk about sexism in gaming.

No you're just getting mad at me for a little slur and trying to shame me.

I am not mad and there is no need for me to shame you when you have so clearly already accomplished that.

 

[Branindain]

I understand why females would feel somewhat disenfranchised by modern video games (although maybe that's the wrong word, since they were never really "enfranchised" in the first place). I can also understand people who are worried that the political correctness police are going to stamp their jackboots all over their hobby. The history of these kinds of movements suggests that the former group will have their way in the end and the latter's fears will be shown to be overinflated and slowly forgotten as everything calms down.

What I can't understand is how Anita came to be the centrepiece of all this. As the current MLK figure of this crusade she should be inspiring and polarising, and certainly she generates a mountain of forum hits from fans and haters, but to my eye she and her video series are just... meh. Dull. Disappointing. I guess modern internet culture can work itself into a frenzy over just about anything. But I'm hoping a better figurehead comes along.

 

[pezofdoom]

I will take Anita seriously when she presents more than her opinion. She claims to use her videos and points in academic environments and claims they were intended for use in academia.

Yet she presents no sources, no research, no standard of evidence, not a thing. I have seen all her videos and read a lot of the things she has written. All I ever see is snarky shots taken at an industry using cherry picked examples taken out of context to smear the games industry.

I've watched several of her videos before I lost interest...but most of what she says seems to be pretty common sense to me. I mean you don't need to site sources to say "Princess Peach's hip bump attacks are sexist" because they kinda are.

(personal opinion) At first I was iffy on the whole smearing the game industry thing, after hearing some of the crap reasons they give for making female characters a certain way, I'd have to agree that there are a lot of game designers/executives that need to be slapped. The Dragon's Crown fiasco was the tipping point for me. I wouldn't have minded the art, but the way they defended it was just...not right.

Even Skyrim...I mean seriously with Dawnguard, could you make Serana just a bit less of a helpless victim /complainer and a bit more character to her conversations? She's supposed to be an ancient vampire lord that's survived thousands of years and it was like traveling with a stereo-typical 16 year old girl.


Although I doubt I'll watch any more of Anita's videos, I hope she'll add to the landslide of push back of gamers to the gaming industry for developers to make games that are unique and more fun. Less sequels or clones with the same old game mechanics and stories and maybe something that reminds us of how we felt when we first started playing games.