surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
send message
follow
followers
This video is pretty crap. It's making huge leaps and assumptions, worse then those criticized in Sarkeesian's work.
In fact, I would go as far to say that the inferences here are bordering on adhominem.
In fact, I would go as far to say that the inferences here are bordering on adhominem.
I guess it does go overboard on the 2nd half, but I thought the whole section analyzing her thesis made it still worth a watch. Once he brought up Kanye West, I kind of stopped caring about anything he was saying.
The video itself was rather silly and it's just giving more attention to Ms. Sarkeesian. Her previous work is fluffy videos which are somewhat entertaining but no more or less so than dozens of other utube bloggers out there.
I've been loving seeing men running about in desperation because a female is criticizing their status quo in society and the products they put out.
I think she makes a lot of valid points. I think it's the whole $150, 000 thing people seem to be latching on the most because they don't dare to even question themselves.
"In fact, I would go as far to say that the inferences here are bordering on adhominem."
Yes, I was thinking that when I saw that video.
I think she makes a lot of valid points. I think it's the whole $150, 000 thing people seem to be latching on the most because they don't dare to even question themselves.
"In fact, I would go as far to say that the inferences here are bordering on adhominem."
Yes, I was thinking that when I saw that video.
Ok @overthesun what you're now saying is because someone went on kickstarter asked for public funding for a project its wrong for the public to comment on it.
I have questioned stuff myself and quite honestly I'd rather see someone with an established quality level take this on.
If you ask for funding from the public then why shouldn't the funders be able to have a say towards it now ?
If you make anything public people have ever right to interfere more so if you're appealing to them for funding and claiming to be doing anything as any kind of legitimate research in the way this is being done.
I have youtube comments on my channel some of which are pretty bad, why are they still there ?
Because people wanted to say them and I'm not going to censor them.
The greater worry is that rather than further the cause of women in gaming she could damage it by going "feminazi" on it and picking any hint of sexualisation as sexism and having done a parody of this already you can see how the same thinking can be applied to the vast array of topless male characters in gaming.
One of the best quotes on this was from John Holmes talking to women about video games for Lollipop chainsaw coming from Jessica Nigri where she was asked about if it was sexist to wear the Juliet outfit to which she replies how its her choice to wear it and it's sexist to tell her she can't wear it when its her own choice to wear it.
I have questioned stuff myself and quite honestly I'd rather see someone with an established quality level take this on.
If you ask for funding from the public then why shouldn't the funders be able to have a say towards it now ?
If you make anything public people have ever right to interfere more so if you're appealing to them for funding and claiming to be doing anything as any kind of legitimate research in the way this is being done.
I have youtube comments on my channel some of which are pretty bad, why are they still there ?
Because people wanted to say them and I'm not going to censor them.
The greater worry is that rather than further the cause of women in gaming she could damage it by going "feminazi" on it and picking any hint of sexualisation as sexism and having done a parody of this already you can see how the same thinking can be applied to the vast array of topless male characters in gaming.
One of the best quotes on this was from John Holmes talking to women about video games for Lollipop chainsaw coming from Jessica Nigri where she was asked about if it was sexist to wear the Juliet outfit to which she replies how its her choice to wear it and it's sexist to tell her she can't wear it when its her own choice to wear it.
@The Kodu
Just a note on the Lollipop chainsaw thing. When a real person chooses to do something, more power to them they made what one would hope is an informed choice. When a game character does something, they don't have free will, and so it was their the creator who decided their actions/attire. It was not a choice. It's just a weird argument. If I made a male stripper game with the main male character saying "Men are stupid & women are superior! We should obey them!" with a smile and obvious happiness. I guess that wouldn't be blatantly misandrist on my part because the character is enjoying his life and saying stuff like this, It's his "Choice".
Real people have choice.
Game characters are created and have no choice therefore to say Juliet chooses to ware the outfit or is happy to do so is meaningless.
John Holmes missed that point.
Aside from that video was Blah.
Just a note on the Lollipop chainsaw thing. When a real person chooses to do something, more power to them they made what one would hope is an informed choice. When a game character does something, they don't have free will, and so it was their the creator who decided their actions/attire. It was not a choice. It's just a weird argument. If I made a male stripper game with the main male character saying "Men are stupid & women are superior! We should obey them!" with a smile and obvious happiness. I guess that wouldn't be blatantly misandrist on my part because the character is enjoying his life and saying stuff like this, It's his "Choice".
Real people have choice.
Game characters are created and have no choice therefore to say Juliet chooses to ware the outfit or is happy to do so is meaningless.
John Holmes missed that point.
Aside from that video was Blah.
@Plerpo the problem with going with that argument about free will is firstly its creating more of a disconnect between reality and gaming and as such by forcing just female characters to cover up is sexist again as its not just video game women who appear in various states of undress so under the free will arguement Jacob from Twilight is fine but Kratos is sexist.
If someone did make a game like that I can tell you I wouldn't be up in arms, heck I believe that's almost the story of the film Magic Mike except with more "these men are really emotional black holes ans super egotistical / troubled" however if I operated the same on the present level I would call it a giant outrage. Yet I don't as quite honestly I'd find it funny for someone to do that and hell if that's what market forces want the only part I'd consider sexist would be what was said but the counter point isn't said by men in videogames either at present.
The defining point is how you see gaming as if you consider sexualisation to be a form of sexism then there's a hell of a lot of classical art that's inherently sexist because "OMG it shows a naked woman".
If someone did make a game like that I can tell you I wouldn't be up in arms, heck I believe that's almost the story of the film Magic Mike except with more "these men are really emotional black holes ans super egotistical / troubled" however if I operated the same on the present level I would call it a giant outrage. Yet I don't as quite honestly I'd find it funny for someone to do that and hell if that's what market forces want the only part I'd consider sexist would be what was said but the counter point isn't said by men in videogames either at present.
The defining point is how you see gaming as if you consider sexualisation to be a form of sexism then there's a hell of a lot of classical art that's inherently sexist because "OMG it shows a naked woman".
@The Kodu
Sexualisation is in itself not bad. Its when sexualisation appears to cross into objectifying. Take Trip from Enslaved, she is shown in a sexy outfit but her development doesn't stop there and Monkey himself is also in a state of undress. Taking climate/setting etc into account it's all good. I'm not saying female characters can't be sexy but more often than not that is ALL they are. REZ the women used to look like women and their outfits made sense in the setting. Now it's just weird... Also the sheer number of "Bad" women in games shown dressed "sluttishly" reinforces slut shaming.
I just really dislike the argument that Bayonetta is empowered because she chooses to live her life that way, instead of some one wrote it that way.
As for twilight and Kratos - Film and other media do get the free will argument thrown around a lot too because its just as applicable. Jacob was written by a person, his actions are not those of an empowered individual but a puppet and a badly written one to push a point. A lot of feminists are pissed off with the Magic Mike film because of how it portrays men and women in the film I.E. People are things we can use. It's not the sexual imagery they have a problem with but how that is used as an excuse to ignore that fact that there is a person behind the sex. As for classic art a lot of it was sexist and not because of the nudity shown.
Sexualisation is in itself not bad. Its when sexualisation appears to cross into objectifying. Take Trip from Enslaved, she is shown in a sexy outfit but her development doesn't stop there and Monkey himself is also in a state of undress. Taking climate/setting etc into account it's all good. I'm not saying female characters can't be sexy but more often than not that is ALL they are. REZ the women used to look like women and their outfits made sense in the setting. Now it's just weird... Also the sheer number of "Bad" women in games shown dressed "sluttishly" reinforces slut shaming.
I just really dislike the argument that Bayonetta is empowered because she chooses to live her life that way, instead of some one wrote it that way.
As for twilight and Kratos - Film and other media do get the free will argument thrown around a lot too because its just as applicable. Jacob was written by a person, his actions are not those of an empowered individual but a puppet and a badly written one to push a point. A lot of feminists are pissed off with the Magic Mike film because of how it portrays men and women in the film I.E. People are things we can use. It's not the sexual imagery they have a problem with but how that is used as an excuse to ignore that fact that there is a person behind the sex. As for classic art a lot of it was sexist and not because of the nudity shown.
Plerpo: This is a debate I actually find fascinating. Who are characters in books, games, movies, etc.? Obviously, they are a product of their creators, but do they not become something more upon creation? Once they have a personality, that personality impacts the shape of the story and other characters. Do these characters have to be created to conform to some kind of idealistic mold when real people do not? Jessica Nigiri is a real person who chooses to wear "sexy" outfits, but why is it so much worse for the character of Juliet Starling if she mimics a personality and choice that is very real though she is not? And if characters should conform to some kind of ideal, whose ideals must they be?
