surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
send message
follow
followers
After watching the whole thing again, I get what he's saying about the youtube comments. It really is pretty remarkable that she blatantly admits that she's deciding which comments to share based solely on their "strategic" value. I mean, wow.
I think my issue with the thing is very few people are willing to actually do research as well as delve into solutions. And yes, I do mean ACTUAL research. Actual research doesn't come with an agenda and unfortunately, we've forgotten this. There is also a bit of pandering going on. Jim Sterling is the leading example of this on the website. Like when the EA Spokeswoman said "It's great we're getting more women in the industry as a whole," yes, yes, a thousand times I agree. But then she shit all over her sexism statement by saying "It's proven women are better in leadership positions, etc, and so forth." This, is essence, is sexism. But this statement was applauded because, well, calling it out doesn't fit the agenda. ANYTHING, given enough time and desperation can be warped to an agenda and Jim Sterling does this well. I mean he even found a way to make "friend zone" mean "It's man entitlement to pussy." That kind of train of thought requires at least 15 transfers, possibly three weeks in layovers, and at least a boat ride or three yet it doesn't get called out. Then again, I've also heard people claim commiting heterosexual sex with any form of penetration is societal conceptual rape of women.
He did a pretty poor job when you actually watch the whole thing. He's no better than her in quality and true aims.
I'll admit I haven't watched part 1 of his series, and based on this chapter I'd rather not. His claims, even in the first few minutes, are ridiculous. Praising gaming's ability to increase hand-eye coordination cheapens the art? That's not an assault on video games, it's a statement that, despite the issues facing games today, they're still a valuable and important part of society. We can't hide behind "art" like it's some kind of criticism reflector. About the time he was trying to insinuate Sarkessian's goal was to pass legislation restricting video games, I gave up. I honestly couldn't watch the whole thing, so I'll do my best to respond to your post instead.
Sarkessian has outlined her main goal many times, primarily in interviews. It's education. It's to help give people the tools with which to critically examine media; media studies students would call this media literacy. If people don't want those tools, that's on them. Judging by the amount of subscribers and positive comments on her youtube, though, I'd say many do.
If you support a belief that women deserve equal rights to men, you are a feminist. If you don't believe me, type "define feminism" into google and it'll tell you that it is the advocacy of women's rights equal to men. Asking why feminists cling to the feminist name is like asking why gamers cling to a 'gamer' name. Some don't, but many do because it is describes part of who they are. I think a better question is why isn't everyone a feminist?
Sarkessian has never claimed to represent all women; I'm not sure where this idea ever came from.
Policing her youtube comments is her prerogative. I don't think it's necessarily bad to say "If these comments are offensive, irrelevant, or hateful I'll remove them." It certainly didn't stop people from taking those comments elsewhere. There's no way to know if she's abusing the comments system without evidence that she's removing comments purely based on disagreement. Even if she is, it doesn't disprove or cheapen any of the things she's saying in her arguments. It just means we need to watch her videos with a more critical eye, and I imagine that's what she wants anyway.
Sarkessian has outlined her main goal many times, primarily in interviews. It's education. It's to help give people the tools with which to critically examine media; media studies students would call this media literacy. If people don't want those tools, that's on them. Judging by the amount of subscribers and positive comments on her youtube, though, I'd say many do.
If you support a belief that women deserve equal rights to men, you are a feminist. If you don't believe me, type "define feminism" into google and it'll tell you that it is the advocacy of women's rights equal to men. Asking why feminists cling to the feminist name is like asking why gamers cling to a 'gamer' name. Some don't, but many do because it is describes part of who they are. I think a better question is why isn't everyone a feminist?
Sarkessian has never claimed to represent all women; I'm not sure where this idea ever came from.
Policing her youtube comments is her prerogative. I don't think it's necessarily bad to say "If these comments are offensive, irrelevant, or hateful I'll remove them." It certainly didn't stop people from taking those comments elsewhere. There's no way to know if she's abusing the comments system without evidence that she's removing comments purely based on disagreement. Even if she is, it doesn't disprove or cheapen any of the things she's saying in her arguments. It just means we need to watch her videos with a more critical eye, and I imagine that's what she wants anyway.
Didn't even bother watching it. I don't agree with what Sarkeesian is doing, but frankly the over-reaction of a small group of gamers ensured that she now has their dream job of getting free games and then getting paid over $150,000 for giving her opinions on these games. Their harassment of her has now likely assured her a voice in the gaming industry, where she may not have had one before.
I do disagree somewhat with Mystakin's view though. Sarkeesian has never claimed to represent women, but does make comments like "and this type of harassment happens whenever women speak up about gender issues in gaming". No. No, it doesn't. It happens when someone asks for $6,000 to buy video games Sarkeesian also speaks of giving a presentation to Bungie to offer her advice on creating better female game characters (better for who though? Better for feminists or better for the much broader female audience which are entirely different demographics). Most of the articles written about her (and the interviews she has given) don't seem to focus as much on the topic of looking at old tropes, but rather focus on the misogyny of of the way she was treated (with few looking at "why", but almost everyone looking at "how").
Sarkeesian may not claim to speak for women, but the general perception out there is that she does, and she has done little to correct this misconception because that would mean having to admit that her vision of feminism is not what the majority of women want nor what would sell to women - and this is not in her best interest if she hopes to continue making money or recognition as a feminist media critic.
She also claims to want her videos to create conversation on the topic of how women are portrayed in games - but there can be no conversation if she moderates all comments on her work. It's not a bad thing to do, but it certainly limits conversation. Most of the reasoned voices I've seen AGAINST her work have come from other women, yet she has never addressed the issues raised and instead seems very focused on the hate-reaction.
She's not stupid. With her various degrees I'm sure that she's extremely aware of the power of the victimocracy that we currently live in. By focusing so many of her articles/updates on all the hate she's received, without ever addressing any of the viable criticisms or concerns - she had to have been aware that the stronger the victimization, the more the societal offset in terms of support. While the videos I've seen from her to date seem very fluffy and entertaining without being very analytical or truly insightful - I don't have any doubt that she herself seems quite intelligent and very capable of manipulating media to her own benefit.
The basic distillation of the whole event is that the very concept of asking for money to buy games hit a nerve in gamer culture and to have the temerity to do so (male or female) was to invite ridicule and harassment. To do so with the intention of examining female tropes in games (that has been done so often before), was the needed fuel for the bonfire. Ms. Sarkeesian isn't involved in gamer culture though... she is a feminist media critic. Her views have much less to do with games or gamers and much more to do with feminism and general media.
Her work likely will create conversation, but unfortunately I suspect that the conversation will not be a pleasant one.
I do disagree somewhat with Mystakin's view though. Sarkeesian has never claimed to represent women, but does make comments like "and this type of harassment happens whenever women speak up about gender issues in gaming". No. No, it doesn't. It happens when someone asks for $6,000 to buy video games Sarkeesian also speaks of giving a presentation to Bungie to offer her advice on creating better female game characters (better for who though? Better for feminists or better for the much broader female audience which are entirely different demographics). Most of the articles written about her (and the interviews she has given) don't seem to focus as much on the topic of looking at old tropes, but rather focus on the misogyny of of the way she was treated (with few looking at "why", but almost everyone looking at "how").
Sarkeesian may not claim to speak for women, but the general perception out there is that she does, and she has done little to correct this misconception because that would mean having to admit that her vision of feminism is not what the majority of women want nor what would sell to women - and this is not in her best interest if she hopes to continue making money or recognition as a feminist media critic.
She also claims to want her videos to create conversation on the topic of how women are portrayed in games - but there can be no conversation if she moderates all comments on her work. It's not a bad thing to do, but it certainly limits conversation. Most of the reasoned voices I've seen AGAINST her work have come from other women, yet she has never addressed the issues raised and instead seems very focused on the hate-reaction.
She's not stupid. With her various degrees I'm sure that she's extremely aware of the power of the victimocracy that we currently live in. By focusing so many of her articles/updates on all the hate she's received, without ever addressing any of the viable criticisms or concerns - she had to have been aware that the stronger the victimization, the more the societal offset in terms of support. While the videos I've seen from her to date seem very fluffy and entertaining without being very analytical or truly insightful - I don't have any doubt that she herself seems quite intelligent and very capable of manipulating media to her own benefit.
The basic distillation of the whole event is that the very concept of asking for money to buy games hit a nerve in gamer culture and to have the temerity to do so (male or female) was to invite ridicule and harassment. To do so with the intention of examining female tropes in games (that has been done so often before), was the needed fuel for the bonfire. Ms. Sarkeesian isn't involved in gamer culture though... she is a feminist media critic. Her views have much less to do with games or gamers and much more to do with feminism and general media.
Her work likely will create conversation, but unfortunately I suspect that the conversation will not be a pleasant one.
@mystakin
if her goal is to educate then i can fly, the pigs can fly and this world is a dream.
watch some of her videos (if you can even sit trough one of them).
it's pretty obvious that the goal she states and what she's actually trying are continents apart.
if her goal is to educate then i can fly, the pigs can fly and this world is a dream.
watch some of her videos (if you can even sit trough one of them).
it's pretty obvious that the goal she states and what she's actually trying are continents apart.
@Elsa
the problem with stating you're going to make videos about tropes and "research" them is that, without someone already "researching" it it wouldn't have been a trope to begin with.
so i think the outrage is more gamer rage because she's just gonna make a whole line of videos with complaints without the: "and this is how we solve this"
(one of the best laughs i've had with her videos was the lego one.
she complained that making everything purple and pink for girls was sexist while being clad in a full purple/pink outfit, it was lovely)
the problem with stating you're going to make videos about tropes and "research" them is that, without someone already "researching" it it wouldn't have been a trope to begin with.
so i think the outrage is more gamer rage because she's just gonna make a whole line of videos with complaints without the: "and this is how we solve this"
(one of the best laughs i've had with her videos was the lego one.
she complained that making everything purple and pink for girls was sexist while being clad in a full purple/pink outfit, it was lovely)
@theEvil1... but there's nothing that Sarkeesian can say about how to solve any issues in regards to the portrayal of female game characters. Even among feminists themselves there seems quite a strong disagreement as to whether Bayonetta is an interesting, independent woman who owns her sexuality or if she's simply a reflection of male masturbatory material (or is she's both). Ask 10 women their opinion of Lara Croft and you'll get 10 very different opinions. Sarkeesian would have a difficult enough time presenting a view that feminists could agree with, without coming close to an opinion that female gamers could agree with, and the opinions likely become even more divergent once male gamers are involved.
You're right that this is one of the very valid criticisms aimed at her projects. She is examining a broad range of games (including many older games) for common themes.... when everyone is mostly already aware of these common themes. Certainly a developer doesn't throw in a "sexy villainess" without realizing that it's likely been done before... in fact they probably take great care to ensure that her almost non-existent clothing isn't too close to another villainess's lack of attire so as to create a possible copyright infringement. She hasn't addressed the criticism of what purpose her videos will serve, because it's very likely that they are nothing the gaming community hasn't already been aware of and heard before.
However... that being said, what she will be able to do is allow non-gamers some insight into these common themes, which is rather unrepresentative of current gaming because many of these older tropes are gradually changing... and will continue to change to meet the needs and expectations of the growing population of female and male gamers who have different expectations. As a media, gaming is very young and is evolving at an incredibly fast rate. I don't know that examining old tropes adds to the existing discussion and I don't think it represents current gaming well to non-gamers.
Again, there are many different and valid concerns with what she is doing as you've noted... and she appears to have no intention of addressing them and instead she seems quite intent on addressing sexism in the gaming world, wherever she can find it.
.. but controversy make more money than a study of the topic (where valid numbers of gamers are surveyed or consulted and the results are simply tabulated and presented), or than an analytical look at the topic or even a common sense approach.
You're right that this is one of the very valid criticisms aimed at her projects. She is examining a broad range of games (including many older games) for common themes.... when everyone is mostly already aware of these common themes. Certainly a developer doesn't throw in a "sexy villainess" without realizing that it's likely been done before... in fact they probably take great care to ensure that her almost non-existent clothing isn't too close to another villainess's lack of attire so as to create a possible copyright infringement. She hasn't addressed the criticism of what purpose her videos will serve, because it's very likely that they are nothing the gaming community hasn't already been aware of and heard before.
However... that being said, what she will be able to do is allow non-gamers some insight into these common themes, which is rather unrepresentative of current gaming because many of these older tropes are gradually changing... and will continue to change to meet the needs and expectations of the growing population of female and male gamers who have different expectations. As a media, gaming is very young and is evolving at an incredibly fast rate. I don't know that examining old tropes adds to the existing discussion and I don't think it represents current gaming well to non-gamers.
Again, there are many different and valid concerns with what she is doing as you've noted... and she appears to have no intention of addressing them and instead she seems quite intent on addressing sexism in the gaming world, wherever she can find it.
.. but controversy make more money than a study of the topic (where valid numbers of gamers are surveyed or consulted and the results are simply tabulated and presented), or than an analytical look at the topic or even a common sense approach.
@mystakin: "If you support a belief that women deserve equal rights to men, you are a feminist. If you don't believe me, type "define feminism" into google and it'll tell you that it is the advocacy of women's rights equal to men. [...] I think a better question is why isn't everyone a feminist?"
This really is the key question here. I'm happy to give my answer by shooting you some links to watch. However, the answer to this question won't come quickly. It you genuinely wanted to find the answer to that last question, and you weren't just asking rhetorically, then watch these videos and think about what she's saying for a while. That's the best answer you'll ever get.
"me, a feminist? No way."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqEeCCuFFO8&feature=plcp
"NAFALT!!!!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQWoNhrY_fM&feature=plcp
"Feminism and the Disposable Male"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vp8tToFv-bA&feature=plcp
I don't agree with every single thing she says, but she definitely has an interesting viewpoint, and she definitely will answer your question. It's probably going to be a shock to the system to hear any kind of gender theory that's not rooted in feminism - I know it was a shock to me.
The short version of your answer is that the dictionary definition of feminism is not what it actually is. Also, trying to achieve gender equality by focusing entirely on the issues of only one gender is a deeply flawed approach.
The closer we get to gender equality, the more sexist that kind of approach becomes. Do you understand that concept? Basically, feminism is destined to die. If we theoretically ever achieve gender equality, the whole ideology would then have to be retired. But ask yourself, what if we achieve gender equality and that ideology is not retired? A lot of people major in women's studies in school, make careers out of this, and make a great deal of money as well. Do you think there's a possibility that certain people might refuse to disband the ideology? I think it's all but guaranteed.
So, why put your effort into supporting a movement that is required to die once it achieves it's goals (or else become tyrannical and hypocritical)? I think the easier solution would just be to focus on gender issues that both sexes have to face, and to focus on gender equality theory and studies from every angle, not just women.
I can see the need for feminism in the middle east maybe. But I no longer see any reason to keep it going in the west. The few tiny areas where some inequality exists (on both sides) would be more successfully dealt with through egalitarianism, or humanism.
That's my rushed take on it. If you watch the videos, you'll get a much more thorough, intellectual, theory-based approach to tackling the entire concept of the movement itself, and looking at everything from a different perspective.
This really is the key question here. I'm happy to give my answer by shooting you some links to watch. However, the answer to this question won't come quickly. It you genuinely wanted to find the answer to that last question, and you weren't just asking rhetorically, then watch these videos and think about what she's saying for a while. That's the best answer you'll ever get.
"me, a feminist? No way."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqEeCCuFFO8&feature=plcp
"NAFALT!!!!"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQWoNhrY_fM&feature=plcp
"Feminism and the Disposable Male"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vp8tToFv-bA&feature=plcp
I don't agree with every single thing she says, but she definitely has an interesting viewpoint, and she definitely will answer your question. It's probably going to be a shock to the system to hear any kind of gender theory that's not rooted in feminism - I know it was a shock to me.
The short version of your answer is that the dictionary definition of feminism is not what it actually is. Also, trying to achieve gender equality by focusing entirely on the issues of only one gender is a deeply flawed approach.
The closer we get to gender equality, the more sexist that kind of approach becomes. Do you understand that concept? Basically, feminism is destined to die. If we theoretically ever achieve gender equality, the whole ideology would then have to be retired. But ask yourself, what if we achieve gender equality and that ideology is not retired? A lot of people major in women's studies in school, make careers out of this, and make a great deal of money as well. Do you think there's a possibility that certain people might refuse to disband the ideology? I think it's all but guaranteed.
So, why put your effort into supporting a movement that is required to die once it achieves it's goals (or else become tyrannical and hypocritical)? I think the easier solution would just be to focus on gender issues that both sexes have to face, and to focus on gender equality theory and studies from every angle, not just women.
I can see the need for feminism in the middle east maybe. But I no longer see any reason to keep it going in the west. The few tiny areas where some inequality exists (on both sides) would be more successfully dealt with through egalitarianism, or humanism.
That's my rushed take on it. If you watch the videos, you'll get a much more thorough, intellectual, theory-based approach to tackling the entire concept of the movement itself, and looking at everything from a different perspective.
@Elsa: Great post. It's ironic that you didn't watch the video because you covered so many topics that were straight out of the video. I think you do it more diplomatically, but a lot of the points he raises ring just as true as yours.
I think that most of the overreaction is the result of zero representation in the media. Kotaku, Destructoid, everyone seems to be pushing a feminist angle in gaming lately in one way or another. Commenters are really the only ones disagreeing, because no professional has dared to. The only critical article of anything slightly feminism-related was the promoted blog here on Destructoid from Chris. I noticed that most of the comments in that article were much calmer, because felt they were heard, for the very first time probably.
It's not shocking to me that people feel the need to shout from the rooftops, and cross lines in their insults that make themselves look bad at times. I think that if we had a more balanced conversation in the media, people would be much more relaxed.
If people feel like they're being hit from every angle, and no one understands, or is even listening to them, they get desperate and lash out. Everyone always goes to such great lengths to promote the value of this "conversation." But so far, the conversation has been entirely one sided. We haven't even come close to having a conversation. It's more like a one sided blitzkrieg designed to hit hard and fast, drown out opposition, and achieve their agenda.
I think that most of the overreaction is the result of zero representation in the media. Kotaku, Destructoid, everyone seems to be pushing a feminist angle in gaming lately in one way or another. Commenters are really the only ones disagreeing, because no professional has dared to. The only critical article of anything slightly feminism-related was the promoted blog here on Destructoid from Chris. I noticed that most of the comments in that article were much calmer, because felt they were heard, for the very first time probably.
It's not shocking to me that people feel the need to shout from the rooftops, and cross lines in their insults that make themselves look bad at times. I think that if we had a more balanced conversation in the media, people would be much more relaxed.
If people feel like they're being hit from every angle, and no one understands, or is even listening to them, they get desperate and lash out. Everyone always goes to such great lengths to promote the value of this "conversation." But so far, the conversation has been entirely one sided. We haven't even come close to having a conversation. It's more like a one sided blitzkrieg designed to hit hard and fast, drown out opposition, and achieve their agenda.
@Esla, Not to accuse, but I find it ironic that you would say "her vision of feminism is not what most women want." while discussing a concern that she represents women. It may not be a vision you want, but it is a vision 25,000 youtube subscribers and 7,000 funders want. A part of me thinks the idea that she speaks for women as if they're one governing body is so ludicrous she shouldn't have to come out and say it's false, but if you'd rather she did then that's perfectly reasonable. To me, it's sort of like asking Barack Obama to come out and say he doesn't represent black people, or that Hugh Heffner doesn't represent white men.
Removing hateful, irrelevant, and offensive comments doesn't limit the discussion of media imagery. The question is whether or not you believe those are the only comments she's withholding which would require proof to state otherwise. As for her focus on the hate-reaction, to be fair, that's been the clearly dominant voice since she blew up. It's hard to find the reasonable needle in the hate-filled haystack.
If the idea of having a kickstarter to "buy games" (which was not what the kickstarter was for, entirely) is what incited the rage, why was that not the target of the response? If the fact that her series is about feminism had little to do with it, why was gender the central theme mobs rallied against? I'm sure the 'buy games' aspect made it all that much worse, but I have trouble believing it's the main cause. I find the whole criticism a bit absurd, as well. Since when was the Internet so concerned about how other people spent their money?
You seem very cynical about her project, which saddens me. I think we need to just wait until she has a product to show and judge it on its merits when it releases. The videos should speak for themselves.
@TheEvil1 Methods and theories similar to the ones she uses were taught in my media studies classes multiple times. One of her spillover goals was to develop a curriculum to use in schools for teaching media literacy. It seems pretty obvious to me that education was her intent.
As for the purple and pink thing, there's a difference between owning purple/pink clothes and allowing a character to only own purple/pink things.
----
Say what you want about Sarkeesian, she wrote a Masters Thesis on "Strong Women in Science Fiction and Fantasy Television,” knows games better than any media critic I've ever met, and has a fanbase interested in her work. This isn't her first rodeo; I think she's earned the benefit of the doubt for now.
Removing hateful, irrelevant, and offensive comments doesn't limit the discussion of media imagery. The question is whether or not you believe those are the only comments she's withholding which would require proof to state otherwise. As for her focus on the hate-reaction, to be fair, that's been the clearly dominant voice since she blew up. It's hard to find the reasonable needle in the hate-filled haystack.
If the idea of having a kickstarter to "buy games" (which was not what the kickstarter was for, entirely) is what incited the rage, why was that not the target of the response? If the fact that her series is about feminism had little to do with it, why was gender the central theme mobs rallied against? I'm sure the 'buy games' aspect made it all that much worse, but I have trouble believing it's the main cause. I find the whole criticism a bit absurd, as well. Since when was the Internet so concerned about how other people spent their money?
You seem very cynical about her project, which saddens me. I think we need to just wait until she has a product to show and judge it on its merits when it releases. The videos should speak for themselves.
@TheEvil1 Methods and theories similar to the ones she uses were taught in my media studies classes multiple times. One of her spillover goals was to develop a curriculum to use in schools for teaching media literacy. It seems pretty obvious to me that education was her intent.
As for the purple and pink thing, there's a difference between owning purple/pink clothes and allowing a character to only own purple/pink things.
----
Say what you want about Sarkeesian, she wrote a Masters Thesis on "Strong Women in Science Fiction and Fantasy Television,” knows games better than any media critic I've ever met, and has a fanbase interested in her work. This isn't her first rodeo; I think she's earned the benefit of the doubt for now.
@elsa
i don't want people who do not know a lot about games to hear her opinion first.
it's so badly researched and her video's feel more like a parade of complaints then a valid critique.
i want people to form their own opinions, good or bad, for or against and hearing such a massive onslaught of complaints and nagging in one video before looking at the games in question forms an opinion of something before it can be form by the person him/herself.
besides i'd rather see you making a video series, based on your comments you feel " more "equality" like :P
@mystakin
wasn't there a video by someone about her thesis and how absolutely worthless it was? i don't remember but i'm not going to give her the "benefit of the doubt" for something i haven't read.
i don't want people who do not know a lot about games to hear her opinion first.
it's so badly researched and her video's feel more like a parade of complaints then a valid critique.
i want people to form their own opinions, good or bad, for or against and hearing such a massive onslaught of complaints and nagging in one video before looking at the games in question forms an opinion of something before it can be form by the person him/herself.
besides i'd rather see you making a video series, based on your comments you feel " more "equality" like :P
@mystakin
wasn't there a video by someone about her thesis and how absolutely worthless it was? i don't remember but i'm not going to give her the "benefit of the doubt" for something i haven't read.
1) 25,000 viewers on youtube represent the majority of... anyone? Forget who right now... considering the size of youtube, the idea that 25K is even comparable to the word "most" is kinda laughable.
2) Her past videos speak for her, just as anyone's past works speaks for what we expect out of them. And when her past includes on this very site complaining about Bastion not developing a character (you know, despite her getting more development then your own character) and a video in which she complains about how sexist ads are on torrent sites designed to track pirated movies in one of her own already-released videos. Pretty damn, well... damning. I mean she whines about wanting free movies without porn ads.... ignoring the fact that to get said free movies, she has to break the law. If that's not a sign of how one-sided she is, I don't know what is.
2) Her past videos speak for her, just as anyone's past works speaks for what we expect out of them. And when her past includes on this very site complaining about Bastion not developing a character (you know, despite her getting more development then your own character) and a video in which she complains about how sexist ads are on torrent sites designed to track pirated movies in one of her own already-released videos. Pretty damn, well... damning. I mean she whines about wanting free movies without porn ads.... ignoring the fact that to get said free movies, she has to break the law. If that's not a sign of how one-sided she is, I don't know what is.
@mystakin.... the two most popular games (aside from social games) among women gamers are World of Warcraft and The Sims (which has approximately 50% female gamers) - those stats may be a few years old, but they're easily found. Neither game is what could be deemed a beacon of feminism.
One of the most popular movie series among women is the Twilight series... which Sarkeesian and other feminists have already ripped apart.
No. Her vision of feminism is not what most women want. Most men and women believe in the legal, economic, social and and politicial equality for women. Sarkeesian is closer to the radical feminist movement that believes in destroying gender roles and eradicating patriarchal societal systems like the concepts of marriage, family and heterosexuality that help to further male dominance roles in society.
Her supporters seem to be other feminists who share her belief (and most feminists nowadays who wear the label of "feminist" tend to be radical feminists as conservative feminism has mostly been accomplished in North America) and white knight victimocracy reactionaries who will seek to offset any form of victimization by supporting the victim (see the woman verbally abused by kids on the bus, or the societal reaction to most any natural disaster... there is a desire to help those who are victims within our current society - which is a good thing... but is increasingly being abused by those who play the part of victim when in fact they are the victimizer - though I'm not speaking of Sarkeesian specifically when I say that).
Regarding her youtube subscibers... many of those have likely subscribed in order to critique her work, not support it. The 7,000 actual supporters is a pretty small number - especially given that many of those who gave her money actually know little about the actual project and it was a knee-jerk reaction to the terrible mob attacks on her.
In fact, one of the biggest issues about this whole thing is what exactly are people supporting?? Most people seem to be supporting her as a form of showing support for women in gaming and against misogyny in gaming, but the problem is that they are perpetuating the old stereotype that women are oppressed in the gaming world which in turn may well discourage more women from entering that world and also creates a mindset where every minor incident that does happen is simply "proof" that this misogyny exists. The reality for most women gamers is that gaming can be wonderful and has changed. It's rare to encounter real misogyny in games, online gaming and the gaming world nowadays. It still occurs... but it was decreasing. This entire incident may well see an increase which makes it very difficult for women already in the gaming world.
In essence, the Sarkeesian incident may well put female gamers back a few years in the progress we were making. We were being see increasingly as equals but when a few women start shrilly screaming that we're oppressed, the rest of us may suffer for it when we do speak about gaming issues. Most every FPS game has a thread where women ask for female characters... mostly we were gaining support among other gamers - I suspect that now we're going to be lumped in with "feminists" and other gamers (male and female) will simply say "shut up, we're tired of it".
One of the most popular movie series among women is the Twilight series... which Sarkeesian and other feminists have already ripped apart.
No. Her vision of feminism is not what most women want. Most men and women believe in the legal, economic, social and and politicial equality for women. Sarkeesian is closer to the radical feminist movement that believes in destroying gender roles and eradicating patriarchal societal systems like the concepts of marriage, family and heterosexuality that help to further male dominance roles in society.
Her supporters seem to be other feminists who share her belief (and most feminists nowadays who wear the label of "feminist" tend to be radical feminists as conservative feminism has mostly been accomplished in North America) and white knight victimocracy reactionaries who will seek to offset any form of victimization by supporting the victim (see the woman verbally abused by kids on the bus, or the societal reaction to most any natural disaster... there is a desire to help those who are victims within our current society - which is a good thing... but is increasingly being abused by those who play the part of victim when in fact they are the victimizer - though I'm not speaking of Sarkeesian specifically when I say that).
Regarding her youtube subscibers... many of those have likely subscribed in order to critique her work, not support it. The 7,000 actual supporters is a pretty small number - especially given that many of those who gave her money actually know little about the actual project and it was a knee-jerk reaction to the terrible mob attacks on her.
In fact, one of the biggest issues about this whole thing is what exactly are people supporting?? Most people seem to be supporting her as a form of showing support for women in gaming and against misogyny in gaming, but the problem is that they are perpetuating the old stereotype that women are oppressed in the gaming world which in turn may well discourage more women from entering that world and also creates a mindset where every minor incident that does happen is simply "proof" that this misogyny exists. The reality for most women gamers is that gaming can be wonderful and has changed. It's rare to encounter real misogyny in games, online gaming and the gaming world nowadays. It still occurs... but it was decreasing. This entire incident may well see an increase which makes it very difficult for women already in the gaming world.
In essence, the Sarkeesian incident may well put female gamers back a few years in the progress we were making. We were being see increasingly as equals but when a few women start shrilly screaming that we're oppressed, the rest of us may suffer for it when we do speak about gaming issues. Most every FPS game has a thread where women ask for female characters... mostly we were gaining support among other gamers - I suspect that now we're going to be lumped in with "feminists" and other gamers (male and female) will simply say "shut up, we're tired of it".
I just wanted to say this is some good discussion. It's what this subject needs. It's too early for my 2 cents. Where the hell is my coffee?
@Shinta Those videos are superlong so I hope you'll forgive me for not diving into them and instead going off your summary. I find the idea that feminism is a bad thing because it's "destined to die" a bit silly. You could say the same for the civil rights movement, and that accomplished a lot yet still hasn't reached equality between blacks and whites. If you'd rather advocate for both sides of the fence, that's reasonable and no one should judge you for it. I think it's a shame that feminism has been twisted out of it's real meaning, and I don't believe it was twisted by feminists themselves.
@TheEvil1 I'd like to see who the video was by, but it was obviously good enough to get her Master's degree. I'm more inclined to trust a college of academics over a youtube personality.
@Megabyte I never meant to imply 25,000 was the majority, just that they are a large group. I've seen an article on Bastion discussing Zia but I think it was linked by Sarkeesian, not written. Perhaps it was a different article. In the tweet, though, Sarkeesian even stated she really enjoyed Bastion. The article raised good points about how Zia is underdeveloped compared to the male characters, but I felt it missed the true punch of *spoilers*talking to her at the end of the game.*spoilers* That's the thing about criticism, no one's asking you to agree with it 100%, and you can still love a game while critiquing it's images. I think Scott Pilgrim is a great movie, for example, but Ramona's character is horribly underdeveloped.
As for porn on torrents, think about it from a cultural perspective. Torrenting is part of Internet culture, I feel that's undeniable, and yet it's supported by pornographic images targeted at men. It's just one of many ways Internet culture puts the needs and wants of men ahead of women. It's still "boy's club," in that regard.
@Esla WoW has skimpy clothes but I'm not sure what makes The Sims non-feminist. As for Twilight, we'd have to dig into its demographics to know for sure. I'm inclined to agree with Spill.com and say Twilight is to 13-year old girls what Transformers is to 13-year old boys. Not that only teens enjoy these movies, but that they are the driving force. When that's the main demographic, you don't have to worry about your fans getting up in arms over gender roles because they're still learning them. I'm not convinced that making the characters more complex would eat away at the box office numbers, either.
I don't know where this radical feminist accusation comes from. Do you have any proof of Sarkeesian acting this way?
I'm inclined to think victimizers playing the victims are a handful of bad apples and nothing more. I couldn't find any stats on self-victimization, but there's plenty on victims.
How do you know many subscribed to her youtube to critique her work? How do you know many of her supporters donated money without knowing the cause? Wouldn't it make more sense to believe that most people knew what they were doing when they handed over money to a stranger on the Internet?
Women are oppressed in the gaming world, still. Sites like FatUglyOrSlutty.com, NotInTheKitchenAnymore.com, and PMSClan.com(A website I'm invested in) document that. These aren't one-off incidents that happen occasionally, they happen every gaming session for some girls. I'm not sure where you get the impression that things are worse now then they were at the start of the year.
Esla, you have every right to disagree and not like the project Sarkeesian is working on. You're well-spoken and elaborate in your posts; you deserve respect. That said, all of your critiques ring hollow to me because nothing backs them up. They're assertions against the obvious without any proof of fowl play.
@TheEvil1 I'd like to see who the video was by, but it was obviously good enough to get her Master's degree. I'm more inclined to trust a college of academics over a youtube personality.
@Megabyte I never meant to imply 25,000 was the majority, just that they are a large group. I've seen an article on Bastion discussing Zia but I think it was linked by Sarkeesian, not written. Perhaps it was a different article. In the tweet, though, Sarkeesian even stated she really enjoyed Bastion. The article raised good points about how Zia is underdeveloped compared to the male characters, but I felt it missed the true punch of *spoilers*talking to her at the end of the game.*spoilers* That's the thing about criticism, no one's asking you to agree with it 100%, and you can still love a game while critiquing it's images. I think Scott Pilgrim is a great movie, for example, but Ramona's character is horribly underdeveloped.
As for porn on torrents, think about it from a cultural perspective. Torrenting is part of Internet culture, I feel that's undeniable, and yet it's supported by pornographic images targeted at men. It's just one of many ways Internet culture puts the needs and wants of men ahead of women. It's still "boy's club," in that regard.
@Esla WoW has skimpy clothes but I'm not sure what makes The Sims non-feminist. As for Twilight, we'd have to dig into its demographics to know for sure. I'm inclined to agree with Spill.com and say Twilight is to 13-year old girls what Transformers is to 13-year old boys. Not that only teens enjoy these movies, but that they are the driving force. When that's the main demographic, you don't have to worry about your fans getting up in arms over gender roles because they're still learning them. I'm not convinced that making the characters more complex would eat away at the box office numbers, either.
I don't know where this radical feminist accusation comes from. Do you have any proof of Sarkeesian acting this way?
I'm inclined to think victimizers playing the victims are a handful of bad apples and nothing more. I couldn't find any stats on self-victimization, but there's plenty on victims.
How do you know many subscribed to her youtube to critique her work? How do you know many of her supporters donated money without knowing the cause? Wouldn't it make more sense to believe that most people knew what they were doing when they handed over money to a stranger on the Internet?
Women are oppressed in the gaming world, still. Sites like FatUglyOrSlutty.com, NotInTheKitchenAnymore.com, and PMSClan.com(A website I'm invested in) document that. These aren't one-off incidents that happen occasionally, they happen every gaming session for some girls. I'm not sure where you get the impression that things are worse now then they were at the start of the year.
Esla, you have every right to disagree and not like the project Sarkeesian is working on. You're well-spoken and elaborate in your posts; you deserve respect. That said, all of your critiques ring hollow to me because nothing backs them up. They're assertions against the obvious without any proof of fowl play.
Elsa, mystakin, it's Elsa. *sigh* Why am I incapable of internalizing people's names nowadays. I'm sorry for all the misspellings.
@mystakin...a valid and well spoken response, but it doesn't take much reading to see that Sarkeesian is among those that are termed "radical feminists" and her own thesis is based on society "maintaining a patriarchal division of gender roles" and how media/pop culture upholds "messaging structures of power by giving higher values to masculine attributes as observed in patriarchal discourse".
In another of her blogs she disagrees with Slutwalk and mentions that it ignores (among other issues) radical feminism.
On looking over her work, she rarely deals with legal, social, economic or political equality issues and indeed, most of her work is regarding the patriarchal system and the social oppression of women inherent in that system, specifically though media. Her focus on the eradication of gender roles definitely falls within the definition of radical feminism.
There's nothing inherently wrong with the eradication of gender roles, it's been happening for years now, but much of the issue lies with radical feminists blaming men for the patriarchal system and not recognizing that women are complicit in maintaining this. Many women want to attract men, they want to get married, they want to raise their children, they want to create a home environment that they like. These are all gender roles that radical feminists seek to eradicate.
Certainly Sarkeesian's work to date seems very aimed at the aspect of radical feminism that seeks to eradicate gender roles. She doesn't want women to become men, or men to become women... she wants there to be no distinction at all between genders (though there is that pesky childbirth thing I guess!... hard to get rid of that one). She seems to identify masculine and feminine "traits" and seems to want these eradicated from media.
In regards to women being oppressed in the gaming world, it's really all about attitude. Those that look for oppression, suppression and harassment will find it. Those that just want to play games - they will find that they are simply gamers.
In another of her blogs she disagrees with Slutwalk and mentions that it ignores (among other issues) radical feminism.
On looking over her work, she rarely deals with legal, social, economic or political equality issues and indeed, most of her work is regarding the patriarchal system and the social oppression of women inherent in that system, specifically though media. Her focus on the eradication of gender roles definitely falls within the definition of radical feminism.
There's nothing inherently wrong with the eradication of gender roles, it's been happening for years now, but much of the issue lies with radical feminists blaming men for the patriarchal system and not recognizing that women are complicit in maintaining this. Many women want to attract men, they want to get married, they want to raise their children, they want to create a home environment that they like. These are all gender roles that radical feminists seek to eradicate.
Certainly Sarkeesian's work to date seems very aimed at the aspect of radical feminism that seeks to eradicate gender roles. She doesn't want women to become men, or men to become women... she wants there to be no distinction at all between genders (though there is that pesky childbirth thing I guess!... hard to get rid of that one). She seems to identify masculine and feminine "traits" and seems to want these eradicated from media.
In regards to women being oppressed in the gaming world, it's really all about attitude. Those that look for oppression, suppression and harassment will find it. Those that just want to play games - they will find that they are simply gamers.
@mystakin:
I don't see how Zia was underdeveloped at all. There were a total of 4 characters... a villain a narrator, a blank-slate (all the details we get on "the kid" are based on your actions as a gamer as narrated to us, so it's at least as much a commentation on us over him) without even a name, and Zia. To this perspective, the only ones with more defenition are by their plot-device in the story alone... so unless you want to try to argue she should have been the narrator or the villain, I do not comprehend what kind of argument there is here.
And I dont buy the "internet culture" argument either. It's illegal... which means it's frowned upon BEFORE you worry about how sexist what you see in the process is. Sorry, but if that's a part of "internet culture" then it's a criminal part and something we should be working to minimize AS a culture... much like the comparable crime of theft in the outside world and cultures there. It's nothing but petty to start arguing if it has a sexist element when we already know it's flat-out wrong pretty much in total.
I don't see how Zia was underdeveloped at all. There were a total of 4 characters... a villain a narrator, a blank-slate (all the details we get on "the kid" are based on your actions as a gamer as narrated to us, so it's at least as much a commentation on us over him) without even a name, and Zia. To this perspective, the only ones with more defenition are by their plot-device in the story alone... so unless you want to try to argue she should have been the narrator or the villain, I do not comprehend what kind of argument there is here.
And I dont buy the "internet culture" argument either. It's illegal... which means it's frowned upon BEFORE you worry about how sexist what you see in the process is. Sorry, but if that's a part of "internet culture" then it's a criminal part and something we should be working to minimize AS a culture... much like the comparable crime of theft in the outside world and cultures there. It's nothing but petty to start arguing if it has a sexist element when we already know it's flat-out wrong pretty much in total.
@PhilK3nS3bb3n I seem to be on a roll with this lack of spell-check thing, haha.
@Elsa (got it right this time). I'm not seeing the ties between fighting "a patriarchal division of gender roles" and "eradicating the concepts of marriage, family and heterosexuality." Breaking down the patriarchal division of gender roles just means challenging the gender roles developed by the people who control the message, aka men. Radical feminism in media, as I see it, is simply opposition to males controlling the representation of women, which I don't think is unreasonable. These could be taken to extremes, as you point out, but I have no reason to believe Sarkeesian is taking it that far.
I think the belief that radical feminists want to eradicate attracting men, getting married, raising children, and being a housewife is erroneous. If that was the case, no radical feminist would ever be married or have children and Sarkeesian wouldn't be wearing feminine colors or make-up during her videos. I can understand opposition to certain social rituals -- such as, for example, the man asking the women for the first date or marriage in almost all representations of such events -- but I don't think complete removal of these events is the ultimate goal.
I was once told in college, "The solution to hate speech is not less speech(censorship) but more speech(activism)" and I think the same can be said of media representation. If Sarkeesian is, indeed, trying to eradicate all sexist imagery, I would agree that she is practicing media criticism poorly. Currently, I don't see evidence that this is the case. Certainly not in her Youtube videos.
I disagree that you have to look for oppression to find it in gaming. It may be anecdotal, but I know women that have been run out of communities because they disliked how they were treated and a loud minority wouldn't change while the silent majority stayed out of the issue entirely. These weren't women that were looking for oppression, they were women that just wanted to play games and not be harassed based on gender.
Okay... hopefully I didn't blunder up my spelling in this one, haha.
@Elsa (got it right this time). I'm not seeing the ties between fighting "a patriarchal division of gender roles" and "eradicating the concepts of marriage, family and heterosexuality." Breaking down the patriarchal division of gender roles just means challenging the gender roles developed by the people who control the message, aka men. Radical feminism in media, as I see it, is simply opposition to males controlling the representation of women, which I don't think is unreasonable. These could be taken to extremes, as you point out, but I have no reason to believe Sarkeesian is taking it that far.
I think the belief that radical feminists want to eradicate attracting men, getting married, raising children, and being a housewife is erroneous. If that was the case, no radical feminist would ever be married or have children and Sarkeesian wouldn't be wearing feminine colors or make-up during her videos. I can understand opposition to certain social rituals -- such as, for example, the man asking the women for the first date or marriage in almost all representations of such events -- but I don't think complete removal of these events is the ultimate goal.
I was once told in college, "The solution to hate speech is not less speech(censorship) but more speech(activism)" and I think the same can be said of media representation. If Sarkeesian is, indeed, trying to eradicate all sexist imagery, I would agree that she is practicing media criticism poorly. Currently, I don't see evidence that this is the case. Certainly not in her Youtube videos.
I disagree that you have to look for oppression to find it in gaming. It may be anecdotal, but I know women that have been run out of communities because they disliked how they were treated and a loud minority wouldn't change while the silent majority stayed out of the issue entirely. These weren't women that were looking for oppression, they were women that just wanted to play games and not be harassed based on gender.
Okay... hopefully I didn't blunder up my spelling in this one, haha.
@mystakin... there's absolutely nothing wrong with challenging gender roles at all. It's not dissimilar to challenging the need for violence in video games (what Jack Thompson did). Both are somewhat political agendas looking to change media and both issues could reasonably expect a backlash from the consumers of the media - which they both got.
There is nothing at all wrong with what Sarkeesian is doing, what's wrong is the public perception that she speaks for women and that the changes she seeks are what women in general want. What's wrong is that the reaction to her is seen as representative of the rampant misogyny within gaming, which isn't as common as everyone seems to think. What's wrong is that a negative approach will find negativity. She's not looking at how much gaming has changed and the positive examples of female characters - but instead is examining old tropes.
It serves no purpose for gamers... though again, the purpose it serves is as a feminist examination of media. (and there's nothing wrong with that as long as developers and others don't get confused that the eradication of female game character tropes is what women in general want)
There is nothing at all wrong with what Sarkeesian is doing, what's wrong is the public perception that she speaks for women and that the changes she seeks are what women in general want. What's wrong is that the reaction to her is seen as representative of the rampant misogyny within gaming, which isn't as common as everyone seems to think. What's wrong is that a negative approach will find negativity. She's not looking at how much gaming has changed and the positive examples of female characters - but instead is examining old tropes.
It serves no purpose for gamers... though again, the purpose it serves is as a feminist examination of media. (and there's nothing wrong with that as long as developers and others don't get confused that the eradication of female game character tropes is what women in general want)
@Esla The question is how does a person want media to be changed. Is it through censorship or through an infusion of better, more complex characters in addition to the ones we have. The former rightly deserves a backlash; I don't believe the latter does. The latter is the kind of critique I support, and the kind that I believe Sarkeesian represents. As she says in her Oscars & Bechdel test video:
"While it might make sense that one specific film, like Moneyball, is male-dominated and male-centered and they wouldn't or couldn't incorporate women as characters, the problem is that the vast majority of movies made in Hollywood are male-centered and male-dominated."
I assume she would say the same about gaming, and she'd be right.
The only misogyny I've seen tied to gaming by Feminist Frequency has been the harassment gamers have given her over her series. That's a real and undeniable problem.
We don't know if or how she'll tackle gaming's history in her videos, but I'm not sure there's a lot to discuss, anyway. Games haven't changed that much thematically as far as I can tell. We do know she will have an episode focused on positive female characters in games, though.
I disagree that this serves no purpose for gamers. It serves gamers the same way it serves everyone else. By providing the tools to critically think about the media they're consuming, if the person is looking for said tools. I don't think anyone is trying to take away the Lollipop Chainsaws and Bayonettas of the world. We just want more Alyx Vances and Jades in our entertainment, or perhaps characters more realized than even they are.
"While it might make sense that one specific film, like Moneyball, is male-dominated and male-centered and they wouldn't or couldn't incorporate women as characters, the problem is that the vast majority of movies made in Hollywood are male-centered and male-dominated."
I assume she would say the same about gaming, and she'd be right.
The only misogyny I've seen tied to gaming by Feminist Frequency has been the harassment gamers have given her over her series. That's a real and undeniable problem.
We don't know if or how she'll tackle gaming's history in her videos, but I'm not sure there's a lot to discuss, anyway. Games haven't changed that much thematically as far as I can tell. We do know she will have an episode focused on positive female characters in games, though.
I disagree that this serves no purpose for gamers. It serves gamers the same way it serves everyone else. By providing the tools to critically think about the media they're consuming, if the person is looking for said tools. I don't think anyone is trying to take away the Lollipop Chainsaws and Bayonettas of the world. We just want more Alyx Vances and Jades in our entertainment, or perhaps characters more realized than even they are.
*Elsa
Dammit, I did it again. The lack of an edit button (and my own ineptitude) is REALLY killing me in these comments.
I'll take the opportunity to reply to @Megabyte since I forgot.
I found the post, so I won't try to butcher her meaning: http://gamingaswomen.com/posts/2012/04/non-analog-gaming-bastion-and-men-as-automatic-protagonists/ Again, tweeted by Sarkeesian but not written by her.
"...[Zulf's] motives are sympathetic and very logical. It’s easy to picture yourself making the same choices."
"...[Rucks has a] history as a scientist with severe doubts about the morality of his work and as a mentor figure for the Kid"
"Usually the whole point of having a silent protagonist is to make the protagonist as relateable as possible – a character where its easy for the player to step into their shoes. Being able to play a character that looked like me would have allowed me to do that."
"Zia doesn’t make any tough moral choices, she doesn’t do anything heroic, and she doesn’t get to have any real sense of depth. She’s just kind of… there."
That's the crux of the critique, I believe. As I said, I think the fact that she's the only other voice in the game besides Rucks is a big missing point in the critique.
As for torrenting not being a part of Internet culture... I'm not sure most Internet-goers would agree with that statement. Legal or not, it's just kind of accepted most websites I know of.
Dammit, I did it again. The lack of an edit button (and my own ineptitude) is REALLY killing me in these comments.
I'll take the opportunity to reply to @Megabyte since I forgot.
I found the post, so I won't try to butcher her meaning: http://gamingaswomen.com/posts/2012/04/non-analog-gaming-bastion-and-men-as-automatic-protagonists/ Again, tweeted by Sarkeesian but not written by her.
"...[Zulf's] motives are sympathetic and very logical. It’s easy to picture yourself making the same choices."
"...[Rucks has a] history as a scientist with severe doubts about the morality of his work and as a mentor figure for the Kid"
"Usually the whole point of having a silent protagonist is to make the protagonist as relateable as possible – a character where its easy for the player to step into their shoes. Being able to play a character that looked like me would have allowed me to do that."
"Zia doesn’t make any tough moral choices, she doesn’t do anything heroic, and she doesn’t get to have any real sense of depth. She’s just kind of… there."
That's the crux of the critique, I believe. As I said, I think the fact that she's the only other voice in the game besides Rucks is a big missing point in the critique.
As for torrenting not being a part of Internet culture... I'm not sure most Internet-goers would agree with that statement. Legal or not, it's just kind of accepted most websites I know of.
you know what feminists have to realize first?
men and women, we're different.
we're built different, we think different, we act different.
they see lot's of problems with women in skimpy outfit but men are all about the visual aspect. most women just can't get in to scantily clad men, they need more "background"
we're different.
men and women, we're different.
we're built different, we think different, we act different.
they see lot's of problems with women in skimpy outfit but men are all about the visual aspect. most women just can't get in to scantily clad men, they need more "background"
we're different.
The way the video starts is all you need to know, ever notice that with a few exceptions, that right there tells you that no matter what you say, it will be an exception.
Her argument is based on perpetually moving goalposts, just ignore her.
Her argument is based on perpetually moving goalposts, just ignore her.
I actually finally watched the video... it's pretty good (though Mystakin also speaks a lot of common sense - damn him!).
I'm a feminist... yet I'm so tired of all the negative feminism out there that think I'm just going to do my best to ignore it all - and just play games.... and roam Cyrodiil in my chainmail bikini... while I still can! :)
I'm a feminist... yet I'm so tired of all the negative feminism out there that think I'm just going to do my best to ignore it all - and just play games.... and roam Cyrodiil in my chainmail bikini... while I still can! :)
@Elsa: Actually, your voice is more important than mine will ever be. While people claim to know that Sarkeesian doesn't speak for all women, almost none of them actually know this. The entire premise of all of these articles is that they speak for all women. How else do you think all men are guilted into agreeing?
You gals need to speak up whenever possible, just for the sake of common sense, for true equality (not hyperventilating overreaction), and for the sake of gaming.
You gals need to speak up whenever possible, just for the sake of common sense, for true equality (not hyperventilating overreaction), and for the sake of gaming.
Allow me to answer the quotes, Mystakin...
"...[Zulf's] motives are sympathetic and very logical. It’s easy to picture yourself making the same choices."
This is really what makes him a good villain more then anything. He's kinda like Magneto in that regard.... but it leaves me in the same argument... would she have wanted Zia to be the villain? Because that is exactly what it would have taken.
"...[Rucks has a] history as a scientist with severe doubts about the morality of his work and as a mentor figure for the Kid"
And again, this really happens because he is the narrator. You never discover any of this so much as you are told by him during the narration.
"Usually the whole point of having a silent protagonist is to make the protagonist as relateable as possible – a character where its easy for the player to step into their shoes. Being able to play a character that looked like me would have allowed me to do that."
This... kinda strikes me as shallow, to be blunt. This would be like if I decided to argue that not being able to be a guy in The Longest Journey somehow made the game less.... Sorry, I don't buy it (and that, btw, is one of my favorite point&click titles... really second to Sam & Max exclusively)
"Zia doesn’t make any tough moral choices, she doesn’t do anything heroic, and she doesn’t get to have any real sense of depth. She’s just kind of… there."
ANd I have to respond with "yeah, and?" considering there really wasn't much character developement of any kind in this game. Ever example I've seen of it is more an example of story-device.... narrator, villain, and blank-slate.
Long story short, this wasn't a game that was based on character development... at all. I think this is why I wish to counter her so directly here... I don't even see a base for an argument, much less an argument worth more then "um no" and maybe an explanation as to why if necessary.
"...[Zulf's] motives are sympathetic and very logical. It’s easy to picture yourself making the same choices."
This is really what makes him a good villain more then anything. He's kinda like Magneto in that regard.... but it leaves me in the same argument... would she have wanted Zia to be the villain? Because that is exactly what it would have taken.
"...[Rucks has a] history as a scientist with severe doubts about the morality of his work and as a mentor figure for the Kid"
And again, this really happens because he is the narrator. You never discover any of this so much as you are told by him during the narration.
"Usually the whole point of having a silent protagonist is to make the protagonist as relateable as possible – a character where its easy for the player to step into their shoes. Being able to play a character that looked like me would have allowed me to do that."
This... kinda strikes me as shallow, to be blunt. This would be like if I decided to argue that not being able to be a guy in The Longest Journey somehow made the game less.... Sorry, I don't buy it (and that, btw, is one of my favorite point&click titles... really second to Sam & Max exclusively)
"Zia doesn’t make any tough moral choices, she doesn’t do anything heroic, and she doesn’t get to have any real sense of depth. She’s just kind of… there."
ANd I have to respond with "yeah, and?" considering there really wasn't much character developement of any kind in this game. Ever example I've seen of it is more an example of story-device.... narrator, villain, and blank-slate.
Long story short, this wasn't a game that was based on character development... at all. I think this is why I wish to counter her so directly here... I don't even see a base for an argument, much less an argument worth more then "um no" and maybe an explanation as to why if necessary.
@Shinta
The idea that the only way men could possibly agree with Anita Sarkeesian is that they're so stupid that they think she speaks for all women and therefore are guilted into agreeing with her is almost too mind bogglingly silly to comprehend. Generalizations and logical leaps like that are precisely what kill discussions and turn them into free-for-alls, especially about contentious topics. Unless you're joking (in which case I apologize) what you said there is exactly the opposite of contributing to the debate.
I, for one, don't think anyone assumes Sarkeesian speaks for all women. Her supporters like her because of her particular views and how she expresses them, and those who dislike her dislike her particular views.
Kudos to Elsa and Mystaken for their lively, respectful, thought-provoking debate. That's how it's done.
The idea that the only way men could possibly agree with Anita Sarkeesian is that they're so stupid that they think she speaks for all women and therefore are guilted into agreeing with her is almost too mind bogglingly silly to comprehend. Generalizations and logical leaps like that are precisely what kill discussions and turn them into free-for-alls, especially about contentious topics. Unless you're joking (in which case I apologize) what you said there is exactly the opposite of contributing to the debate.
I, for one, don't think anyone assumes Sarkeesian speaks for all women. Her supporters like her because of her particular views and how she expresses them, and those who dislike her dislike her particular views.
Kudos to Elsa and Mystaken for their lively, respectful, thought-provoking debate. That's how it's done.
