The Most Dangerous Woman in Videogames - Anita Sarkeesian
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Recommended Videos
So wait...sjwho2 said:
She actually promotes the idea of killing a real life person? Even if only in a work of fiction?
That she got the threats is a real thing that happened.. how it came to be and that she actually profitted from it has allready been established.
But i didnt knew that she is not above applauding these things if they are not directed against her...
Quite telling about her character come to think of it.
Right. But when you are casting three protagonists, would it be that difficult for one of them to be female? And I don't just mean inserting one for Political Correctness, or for token reasons - I think it would have made the game much more interesting and compelling if it were well written. It just seems extremely unbalanced toward the male fantasy end of the spectrum.Tenmar said:
But even among the supporting cast in Los Santos, the male NPCs have much more character development than any female characters. Like I said, all the female characters are one-note. Hell, even among the extremely minor characters who only appear via their voice on the car's radio the male characters tend to be of much more significance and more fully fleshed-out.
It's not like I don't enjoy GTA (although this latest release was rather dull) or in-your-face humor, it's that this one had no bite, and just seemed spectacularly unbalanced. It seemed less like satire of a materialistic and bigoted culture than a direct reflection of the industry's misogyny.
EDIT:
Just a footnote that Franklin isn't really well developed as a character. I had to struggle to think of what his actual character arc is, other than "dude from the hood gets rich". He's essentially there as the token black guy, and his story is little more than the lyrics of a rap song (it's actually less complex than the lyrics of some good rap songs).
None of which helps the game's problems. Maybe it is a good thing that the developers didn't add a female character, because she probably would have been horribly written. What I really don't understand is why Rockstar can't hire some decent writers. They certainly have enough money to do so.
Why do you presume this?sjwho2 said:
4chan is a hotbed of trolling - so why would you presume it was Sarkeesian herself going there, rather than one of the 4chan trolls trolling the other 4chan trolls?
Right. And some scripts are shitty. Some scripts show what a bigot the author is.Tenmar said:
How is that even a question? The creator controls how they create their creation. That doesn't mean that the consumers have to agree with the way they created it.
Or you could read the books and then complain about them. How are you supposed to know what's wrong with them if you don't read them? The only way to do so is to rely on second-hand sources.
It's the same as how I can play GTA V to 100% completion and still complain that it was really shittily written. None of the things you bring up make a creation immune from criticism. You keep saying "that's about the writing/narrative" - and I agree that it is. But since when was writing and narrative off the table for critical discourse? It's usually right at the center of it.
Cause no one on 4chan had even heard of her before? Because for only her introduction video she allowed comments to be posted while on every other video she made till that date she either shut comments off completly or heavily moderated them?Aardvaarkman said:
Just some markers that point into a certain direction.
No one said that she is a fool... pulling off such a stunt would be genius from a marketing campaign viewpoint.. and she did get all that money only after all the gaming sites reported on 4chan lashing out at her.
Before that no one had heard of her or was interested in her. This was simply one brilliant marketing stunt to raise attention to her kickstarter.. and it seriously payed out for her in the end no?
My problem is that she's wrong. The claims she makes are often objectively wrong. They're self-contradictory (saying Violence Against Women is a serious problem that needs to be addressed, but objecting to actual depictions of it in games), they're based on incorrect facts and assumptions (saying Jenny's death in the Darkness was about objectifying her, when the person who referred to her as an object is clearly the bad guy and the narrative makes it perfectly clear Jackie cares about her as a person), and their logic is generally a shambles at best (implying Damsel in Distress narratives - you know, the ones about men protecting women - promote Violence Against Women).Full Metal Bolshevik said:
People were talking about sexism in games before Anita came along. My biggest problem with her is both that she's not the critic the subject needs not deserves, and that her patented brand of nonsense is spreading [http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-sexist-video-game-problems-even-bigger-than-breasts/]. Even our own dear Jim Sterling used a picture of Rachel from Ninja Gaiden that cropped out the giant LMG and Waraxe she was weilding in order to say she was objectified. Pay no mind that Rachel is portrayed as a capable character with her own gameplay segments; she's sexy, that means she's just an object. The funny thing is that to claim she was objectified, he had to, well, objectify her. Along with the DOAX girls, who can apply boot to rear in their own games just fine, despite their skimpy clothing.
Moreover, she's painted the negative criticism of her as entirely misogynist, anti-feminist harassment from men, when there are plenty of people, including women and feminists, who have provided more constructive negative criticism. For someone who, IIRC, claims to have academic aims, and talks about opening dialogues and having "conversations with pop culture", her studious avoidance of "peer review" seems very suspect. Even the organized conspiracy- sorry, campaign of thousands of gamers she claims sent her harassment in her TED talk represents less than 1% of even male gamers alone, yet she claims its representative. Moreover, she got harassed largely because someone spammed her KS on 4chan, which is famously misogynist. Either that person was a moron, or they were actively trying to bait 4chan into retaliating. Then she parlayed the harassment into publicity, which lead to more harassment, which led to more publicity, etc.
I really, really hate the idea that criticism of a poor critic can be excused by "well, at least they're getting people talking about the issue!" Especially when said critic seems to want a monologue, not a dialogue. Oh, and to endorse fanfics where she murders people in cold blood, despite claiming that people doing comparable things to her was Not Okay (which it's not) [http://femfreq.tumblr.com/post/58161053721/spider-man-recruits-the-help-of-anita-sarkeesian-to]. Oddly enough, the last time I posted that link in a thread discussing her, her defenders absolutely refused to talk about it, even when I directly asked them if it was okay for her to endorse it.
I suppose this is the part where her more rabid defenders accuse me of being an "MRA troll" (both wrong, even by the Manboobz version of the term*) or other such demonization, while strawmanning or outright ignoring the points I'm making, but doing it in a ~*sardonic*~ manner so they don't get called on it. You can tell whose doing that because they refuse to talk about the matter seriously or admit when they're wrong.
/rant
* IE "Says something I don't like". I'm not exaggerating.
Have you seen the archive of the post?Aardvaarkman said:
http://archive.foolz.us/v/thread/139813364/
It could have been an attempt to troll. The troll failed and the poster had to bump it twice before getting attention. Again, could have been a troll, but seems far more likely to either an honest attempt to drum up support for the kickstarter, or an attempt to get exactly the kind of reaction she got so she could play the victim some more. Either of those would be helpful to her.
Oh, you're very welcome. I'd forgotten I even posted this, since all of my other posts on this forum have been aboutImp Emissary said:Thanks for the link. Love the other people, but haven't heard of the host before.Farther than stars said:
Seems like a nice guy. At the very least, entertaining.
Which I'd be more inclined to blame on the jerks in those circlejerks than on her. I just don't really understand the backlash against her opinions. As a white guy, what do I lose if a bunch of women hold feminist discussions and host a video series? Girls might eventually make games that feature their ideal protagonist? Some day women might get paid the same wages as a man when working the same job? I would understand the negative outbursts if there was some threat against men, but so far nothing really warrants the posts telling her to eat shit.infinity_turtles said:
Wait, how is a woman wearing a bikini "expressing her sexuality" - and what is it that you feel that bikini-wearers are trying to express? I always thought it was about going swimming or going to the beach.Dead Raen said:
Does a man wearing Speedos say something about his sexuality? If so, what?
If you read further down you find this. Looks like a fan of hers made the post.Ukomba said:
anita sarkeesian !!OhXn0YoGyYK Thu May 17 2012 17:04:00 No.139815453 Report
Quoted By: >>139816763 >>139817037
>>139815178
Expenses for the five-part series include:
>research
>lighting
>hiring a good DP
>post-production
>editor
>make-up
And no I'm not Anita. Glad you like the videos, though!
No, it's legitimate criticism. Everyone from Alex Shaw to our own Greg Tito has decried - about GTA 5 - that parody without a message is merely repetition. And repetition of women being marginalized (or even being subjected to cruelty) in video games is specifically what we need less of. And bear in mind these are people who actually like the game, but you can like something while also being aware of its flaws (something that is specifically what Anita Sarkeesian aims to do as well).Tenmar said:
Also, considering the amount of abuse that there was against Carolyn Petit, who made this same criticism in the Gamespot review of this game, I would say that this is a fairly legitimate criticism, because these abusers are exactly the kind of people who are being fueled by the depiction of women in games like GTA 5. Parody is fine, but then it needs to be a lot clearer that what is being parodied is not OK. (For another example of "parody" being done badly, see 'Duke Nukem Forever', which draws similar criticism from Yahtzee of Zero Punctuation.)
Well, proving anything in a gender debate is tricky business from the start. But I don't think that means that we should ignore people who feel marginalized or offended. And I definitely don't think that means that we should scold them for speaking up. That's what most of the flame wars have been about: the fact that Anita even dared to bring up the issue of women in video games in the first place. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't have this debate.valium said:
I'll give you an analogy: when black parents first suggested that their children should go to school with white children, there was a huge outcry. But just because there was an outcry, that doesn't mean that those parents were wrong for speaking up in the first place.
No, it was me stating that the game has very little female agency.Tenmar said:
When did I ever say that I should have control over the creative output of game developers?
But the problem is that it doesn't come across as a parody of the absurd. It comes across more as a fantasy of how things should be. For example, things like awarding a trophy for doing a "booty call" by having sex with a stripper, cementing the notion that women working at strip clubs secretly want to have sex with the patrons, that they are actually prostitutes. Note that completing this action is required for 100% completion. Also notice how while you supposedly develop deep and complex friendships with your male partners, the only role women serve is either penis holes, or bitchy wives.
Is that detrimental to women? Not in itself, but the fact that a large number of pubescent boys play this game while their hormones are in overdrive, and they are only just developing their conception of male-female relationships certainly could be. Do you think it's implausible that any of the players of this game would develop misogynistic ideas from the game's portrayal of women and men?
On the Samus thing: I don't think the issue is that Samus is wearing a bikini. I think the issue is more that she can't be counted as "a good female character", since she's not really a character at all. Sure, the bikini makes her a woman, but there's nothing there to show how her personality is influenced by her femininity.Dead Raen said:
P.S. I am actively disregarding 'Metroid: Other M', like most writers do on this topic. The only contributions that game makes to her character is to make her (1) submissive to male authority and (2) yearning to be a mother. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that not being a character is probably better (from a feminist's perspective).
To a certain degree that's true, but I think your post is actually pretty indicative of why I'd say she's doing harm. Your post is associating the issue of women in games with her, as if they're part and parcel. She's been turned into the voice of the issue and that, not that the issue is being discussed, is the problem a lot of people have.AdagioBoognish said:
Women in games is an important issue that deserved to be talked about, but if you want to talk about it and someone in discussion agrees with her? The discussion is going to melt down, because she's done such a good job of associating anyone who disagrees with her with the trolls and assholes that attacked her. By painting all opposition to her as opposition to solving the issue, she implicitly makes it appear as though her side is the only side wanting to deal with it. Polarizing a nuanced issue destroys discussion.
Before Anita showed up, people did roll their eyes at DoA, they complained about all the samey brown-haired rugged male heroes, they celebrated heroines like Jade from Beyond Good & Evil, and they groaned at the overuse of captured damsels. And most important of all they could discuss the issues without being thrown into one of two camps.
It all depends on how one defines characterisation. Say what you may about Extra Credits [http://extra-credits.net/episodes/learning-from-other-m/] they raised some interesting points regarding what can be inferred about a character without the need for dialog/text.Farther than stars said:
I can agree with that. One problem I have with my room mates, two girls who take a hard stance on feminist issues, is that their strategy for creating discussion is using "somewhat inflammatory statements to bring attention to the problem". They feel, and I don't think they created this tactic, that if you don't use statements to more or less make people angry, then the people you're trying to convince will just brush you off. It draws a line in the sand at the very start of the conversation and I spend most of my time on the defensive, because with them generalizing and polarizing the issue it makes me feel like a part of the problem even though I agree with their core ideas.infinity_turtles said:
I think that Anita, and any people with her level of publicity, should set themselves open to constructive debate. You're right that trying to delegitimize all dissenting opinions won't do any good.
I wasn't trying to put her up as a voice of a movement in my first post though, I'm just sincerely surprised at a lot of the disgusting comments people are throwing out there. I got linked to a 4chan thread and was blown away by the extreme level of disrespect people are showing before I wrote my first comment. With the amount of threats, demonizing, and hateful remarks being directed towards her, I wonder if Anita is very aware of any real arguments against her.
Keep in mind I'm fairly new to her and what she's brought to this whole debate so, like many people, I'm coming into this with a fresh perspective.
this thing blew up to 21 pages. ive read only some of it and i dare say without having read it all that somewhere along the line it deviated from the issue at hand.
a videogame is not a well sponsored art project that sells millions of copies by chance, its a commercial product. and the people that invest into it have a legitimate interest in having their money returned. for that purpose there is only so much innovation that happens at a time or sometimes none.
if she and her sisterhood of self appointed media experts feel that the world is ready for this new era of female game characters, by all means she should just go through the channels everyone else has to go through to pitch their idea to the people who spend the money that is intrusted to them by their investors into it.
if these feminist ideas make it through and the result is favourable so be it.
but i dare say the reason theyve hardly ever tried is that despite how they say that the world is ready for it and the time is now and all that, that is neither the case nor the issue. its probably not a question of the right time and whos ready for what. its probably the idea that sucks, be it yesterday, today or tomorrow. and they know it.
a videogame is not a well sponsored art project that sells millions of copies by chance, its a commercial product. and the people that invest into it have a legitimate interest in having their money returned. for that purpose there is only so much innovation that happens at a time or sometimes none.
if she and her sisterhood of self appointed media experts feel that the world is ready for this new era of female game characters, by all means she should just go through the channels everyone else has to go through to pitch their idea to the people who spend the money that is intrusted to them by their investors into it.
if these feminist ideas make it through and the result is favourable so be it.
but i dare say the reason theyve hardly ever tried is that despite how they say that the world is ready for it and the time is now and all that, that is neither the case nor the issue. its probably not a question of the right time and whos ready for what. its probably the idea that sucks, be it yesterday, today or tomorrow. and they know it.