No Right Answer: Is Anita Sarkeesian Wrong?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT
 

LifeCharacter:

Stalydan:
The problem is that she does have $160,000 and she should use it on the project. Whether it's through marketing her videos, increasing production values or going the extra mile to research her topics, she's socially obligated to use that money that people invested into the series which is releasing at a snail's pace. And yes, people have invested into it and only two parts of a twelve (IIRC) part series have been released, neither of which have presented facts that weren't already on wikipedia or gaming news websites, accessible with a quick google, and sometimes inaccurately.

She's socially obligated to make the video series she promised her backers, not to meet the demands of every random commentator who keeps going on and on about how her series doesn't look like a $160,000 series. Her backers didn't give her all that money on the condition that she significantly expand beyond her original intention, they gave her the money to make the video series she promised and to just flat out give her support. Interviewing developers is not a required part of analyzing a video game's use of tropes, and I doubt doing such things actually cost money, unless all these news sights that interview developers are paying them for it. And, again, you have no idea what the rest of the series looks like; the next episode could have cost $50,000 to make for all you know.

But, iff you have a problem with her arguments, talk about the arguments, don't get petty and complain that her series doesn't look expensive enough for all the money people who aren't you gave her. Because that's exactly what this and the Let's Play issue are, petty little gripes that have no bearing on her actual arguments and only serve as little wins for detractors to celebrate.

Well okay, problems I have with her include her being an anti-sex feminist that doesn't represent all schools of feminism and to many of my friends and people I know from a university feminist society that I personally do not attend but have collaborated with for social events, it is a minority with with many of them being sex-positive so she doesn't give a voice to them. She also relies on the Bechdel test far too much even though she has herself called it unsuitable which it is because the film could have horribly written characters but still pass because they were bitching about another girl while something with a very strong female lead like Pacific Rim doesn't pass because even though Mako talks about deep personal things that don't relate to men, she doesn't talk to another woman about them.

I also dislike how she frequently doesn't research well like how she says Super Princess Peach is one big PMS joke where she's irrational and uses super-powered mood swings to take on enemies which isn't true and she'd know if she'd played the game where Peach is the only character who can control her super-powered emotions. She says Krystal was the star of Dinosaur Planet before Fox replaced her in Star Fox Adventures which again isn't true, Fox replaced Sabre, the other playable character of the game.

J_Russell:
This is rape, there is no other word for it, these bigoted straight white males need to be fired immediately and reported to the authorities for hate speech.

Is this Poe's Law? Are you being serious or are you just having a wank?

Seriously guys,

This thread is a microism of the problem in our hobby.

* People are accusing her of misappropriating money from her Kickstarter. If someone donates 6,000,000 to the Exalted project, do they get angry if some of the money goes to their pockets? No, it's a sign people are happy about the project being done.

* People are accuseding her of not being a real gamer? I'm sorry, is there a bouncer now? Are we keeping the riff-raff out? I was under the impression you were a gamer if you played video games and enjoyed them. Clearly, I don't have the right credentials myself if I just play Xbox or don't fit some nameless criteria.

* Why are people giving a ****? If people are getting upset about a single person saying the hobby is sexist and has some undercurrents of misogyny in development or the fandom--then if you react like it's the end of the world, you better ask yourself. WHY?

If it's wrong, there's no need to defend it. If it's right, maybe there's a problem to address.

Good Lord.

LifeCharacter:

Stalydan:
Well the quality of the videos seems unchanged, the only two differences I could give are new visual animations for the opening and visual demonstrations in the episodes and that her background went from red to blue. They hardly seem to be at all different apart from maybe she's purchased an updated Adobe collection (although her video on how "sexist" the ads on torrent sites makes me believe that "purchased" might not be true).

I'm not familiar with the tech needed to make videos nor their price (though Dan did mention how the equipment for No Right Answer was several thousand dollars), but her kickstarter page does mention that she was working with crappy equipment prior to the kickstarter and the original amount was going to cover some upgrades, with the first stretch goal covering a bunch of them.

The issue is you'd notice. Go back and watch an early Nostalgia critic episode, now what a present one. The quality is so different. Now that's the kind of difference you'd expect with say $70,000 invested in it

LifeCharacter:

Some of the upgrades I'd like to invest in are: a wireless lavallière microphone (which will vastly improve the audio quality), a better studio lighting kit (so I will look less orange), a current generation editing computer/system, harddrives with expanded storage capacity (HD video takes up a lot of bytes), and I would also like to integrate some small After Effects animations to make the videos even more engaging. Achieving this stretch goal will help make this series even more awesome.

And, watching one of her older videos alongside one of the newer ones makes it pretty easy to tell the difference. There are more animations, the lighting is better, the sound is better, and they're also roughly three times as long. It all certainly looks and sounds a hell of a lot better.

But not hugely better.

The jump in her quality is about the same as the jump when I bought a £50 mic and a $200 piece of editing software in terms of how far (my content is far lower quality still but again $250 investment vs how ever many thousands she's spent.

I'd say at most that spending is $20,000 for the kit she wanted. Heck I've output 30 minute long 720P HD videos off a 4 year old laptop that wasn't top of the range when I bought it. I even have a 1TB $80 hard drive I use for storing extra video files and footage.

To get entry level it not as high a spend as people seem to think. That figure I quoted would be a top of the line media PC with a near studio quality camera a decent lighting rig and a pretty good microphone.

LifeCharacter:

As for purchasing games, if she did, I'd like to know why she's not recording her own gameplay footage rather than taking others. For some older games she uses, I can understand that finding a copy can be difficult so using Let's Play footage is easier but for many of the newer games she mentions, it shouldn't be a problem at all.

I'm not really familiar with video capture software/tech (which doesn't seem all that cheap), but maybe she didn't like using it? I'm glad you're not taking the usual route of "She took videos from Let's Plays, so she obviously didn't play the games!" but maybe it's just her being pragmatic? If you had a huge amount of games to play and videos to make, would you be spending your time replaying games just to get that one scene when you could just take it from a video on youtube? I will say that she should have credited the people she took the videos from, but that's about it.

I'd say about $150 for an easy to use near top of the line one.
Useless piece of information. AVGN started out using a $50 DVD recorder to capture his footage and apparently still used that method until about 2 years ago.

Capturing footage isn't quite that tough, once you learn to do it. Learning to do it is half the battle.

LifeCharacter:

She doesn't "have" to do anything just because someone who unironically uses the term white knight said she should. The point of the series was to analyze sexism in video games through their use of tropes, not ask people how they feel about sexism and tropes in video games. She shouldn't have to change her entire damn plan just because she got more money than she asked for.

She doesn't have to you're right. But if it were a project she really cared about then she would have changed it because of the greater scope allowed. That's kind of what people who really want to do this project would do rather than as it looks to many her just seeing video games as another hit list target to cross off.

LifeCharacter:

She's doing exactly what she wanted to do and said she would do. You want her to change her project because you don't see $160,000 in what she's doing, even though you have no idea what she's actually doing. She might have interviews and the extra bits people are complaining about her not having that just haven't shown up yet, it's not like the series is anywhere near over. Or maybe she has an animated short film in one of the episodes that she paid for. I'm not going to assume that she hasn't used the money just because I can't see a $13,000 price stamp on each episode.

Point taken however it does kind of make you wonder as if you had something big, you'd open with it.

LifeCharacter:

The_Kodu:
To record her own footage or to adequately pay those providing footage ?

I've already answered why she might not record her own footage, but the latter part deserves mention in the Let's Players (?) are not entitled to anything more than a credit (which I feel she should have given them). They're not paying the developers to use their entire game for their video, so why should she pay them to use a clip of them using the developer's game for her video?

True they aren't entitled to anything more but it's kind of a nice gesture if their footage is a core part of your content. If you have the money and someone is making a good resource you do at least do it as a gesture.

LifeCharacter:

To fully research topics brought up ?

Yes yes her research is awful, her points are wrong, you don't like her, and your opinion on the quality of her research and videos are something everyone should take into consideration.

No need for the sarcastic tone. If you look critically at the videos there are quite clear omissions. some of which I've pointed out in my replies here.

LifeCharacter:

Believe me you can see a jump in the quality of productions I've made before with just £30 ($50) more funding. Sure to push it further more cash is needed up $160,000 should still show some jump.

There's a noticeable improvement in video quality since the kickstarter, but I'm pretty sure there's a point where some subtle improvement just isn't worth the expensive price tag. I don't know how much her current setup costs, nor do I know how much a setup that would be a noticeable improvement over her current one would cost, so I'm not going to be petty and demand that she get the most expensive thing she can just because she has the money for it.

The chance in set up would be from Doug Walkers first video to his most recent. that kind of change in quality or close to it.

Folksoul:
No, Anita isn't wrong, for the most part. She's just making her point in the most boring way possible.

Yep. Heart in the right place, boring ass videos.

Charles Phipps:
Seriously guys,

This thread is a microism of the problem in our hobby.

* People are accusing her of misappropriating money from her Kickstarter. If someone donates 6,000,000 to the Exalted project, do they get angry if some of the money goes to their pockets? No, it's a sign people are happy about the project being done.

Actually they do. There have been several big Kickstarter fails where people have accused developers of doing just that.

Charles Phipps:

* People are accuseding her of not being a real gamer? I'm sorry, is there a bouncer now? Are we keeping the riff-raff out? I was under the impression you were a gamer if you played video games and enjoyed them. Clearly, I don't have the right credentials myself if I just play Xbox or don't fit some nameless criteria.

Actually her own words in the past were "I'm not very familiar with gaming" now she's switched from that to claiming she is a gamer. OK fine. The problem is if you then try to speak for all gamers of a certain demographic, without the knowledge or experience to show that demographic in their true light.

There are things that people who have been gaming for a while come to realise and people are saying you can't learn all about gaming in only a few months. Especially not enough to be able to talk about the subject as well as some-one like Felica day or Brooke Lee or Lisa Foiles.

there is no gate keeper to being a gamer. However it's not advisable to claim to talk for a whole demographic with very little experience of the subject.

Charles Phipps:

* Why are people giving a ****? If people are getting upset about a single person saying the hobby is sexist and has some undercurrents of misogyny in development or the fandom--then if you react like it's the end of the world, you better ask yourself. WHY?

Here's the issue.
Big money is listening.
EA have shown this.
the problem is EA see this as a way to get easy cash and aren't taking the message on board as intended they are seemingly going "Oh so if we stick this tacked on bit here we can get more girls to buy the game too" instead of looking at the actual issues such a lack of female leads to an extent and better written character (not just female ones.
People fear the companies knee jerk reaction to this because of the attention she's got. [See EA discovering how well microtransactions were doing on mobile games]

Firefilm:
Dan and Chris decided to ring in the new year with setting off the largest explosive they had...debating against Anita Sarkeesian on the internet

Who is this woman and why does her opinion matter?

Alorxico:

Firefilm:
Dan and Chris decided to ring in the new year with setting off the largest explosive they had...debating against Anita Sarkeesian on the internet

Who is this woman and why does her opinion matter?

Sadly her opinion apparently matters because she was "attacked" on the internet.

Really wish there was more reasoning as to why her opinion became the only opinion but that really is what the issue is. Which is a shame cause she uses a logical fallacy in her thesis as well which is generalization. She accuses that playing these games makes people sexist yet no actual specific community or organization is identified. Where is the clan or the guild or even political group being identified?

Not to mention the fact that this whole discussion is on works of fiction. Where developers, and writers should be able to create the content they desire from their imagination and using their skills and business abilities promote and sell the content for distribution to allow others to experience that vision of theirs. Obviously even when you go through that process some will obviously fail but that is the great part about the free market. Which there is a reason that despite how much Dead or Alive gets insulted and how much actual female empowerment actually exists in the narrative, the game is actually a great fighting game. Yet to a person who only looks at the shallow end will just say they are insulted because the characters are not "realistic" which last I checked once again it is a work of fiction. It is also by that same very reason of why video games are becoming better because if people like Anita really think's that little of people who play video games as a hobby as somehow being sexist then someone should ask her as to why games like "The Guy Game" and "BMX XXX" were commercial failures even by the video game hobbyists.

Her thesis is flawed, it isn't well researched, it is completely based on her opinion or reaction from video games and not actually interviewing the people responsible for developing, writing and marketing the games which would of brought a lot more insight and also demonstrate that there are actually quite a bit of women in those critical parts of development and all they were doing was the same thing the men were doing. Creating a video game that they thought people would enjoy.

Video games just like books or movies or music don't have to be geared to everyone. People as well as going to have different tastes. Which is the beauty of actually having that freedom of choice and the freedom to create which is only expanding and not contracting. Yet people seem to instead of actually doing the legwork and taking the time to finding games that interest them like books, people just now want to wallow in their own misery which often just creates more division and makes everyone a bunch of unhappy sods. Which is the real problem, Anita is just so negative, so full of accusations and such little faith in people that why should people listen to her when in her previous work she goes so far as to call people like the man who directed Suckerpunch a "virus". Or how in her Xmas song video she one the same list says that "all I want for xmas is you" is sexist because of the dependency of a man(which honestly is a personal interpretation as a lot of people missing their spouses who are men would honestly want their loved on over material possession), and puts "santa baby" because of how shallow the woman is for wanting said material possessions. Seriously how do you even argue against her when she finds either situation to be sexist?

DeaDRabbiT:

You've heard of Qualitative studies correct? The entire basis a number of scientific theories are set upon is made up of first hand accounts of the affected population. So while a scientist, or even sociologist can't literally "walk a mile in someone else's shoes" they very easily can discuss with that person what walking in their shoes is like.

It is then that "expertise" that they draw from to then argue certain points outside their inherent skillset.

So I'm sorry, but I do think that given the proper research I can very easily argue what it must be like for a woman in a rather male-dominated society, or a foreigner living abroad.

I agree completely agree!

However, I don't think it's a stretch for me to assume that neither you nor the vast majority of guys commenting on this issue are sociologists, and have not done the proper research. Therefore, I think it's fair for me to assume that most of you don't know what you're talking about when it comes to this issue :).

Johnny Novgorod:

Folksoul:
No, Anita isn't wrong, for the most part. She's just making her point in the most boring way possible.

Yep. Heart in the right place, boring ass videos.

I always found this to be an odd complaint.

She never set out to thrill and entertain. She set out to educate and inform.

Do you complain about university lectures being "boring"?

I think the main reason why Anita was attacked is not simple to explain, but at its core it is composed of a context in which female are generally seen and understood as perpetual victims and men as perpetual aggressors (patriarchy). I can only speak for myself, but when I'm playing video games I like to see myself as the hero who gets the babe. It's a form of escapism from a reality that regards men as potential predators or people with irrelevant emotions. So when Anita goes and attack a media that is mostly made and consumed by and for men, it is no surprise that she will receive a negative reaction.

Does anyone believe a man doing the same thing in reverse would have gotten a different response from feminist groups? I'm pretty certain such a man would be open to constant threats and may lose his job for holding a "misogynist" point of view. Imagine:

"Tropes vs Men in Video Games.

Hi, my name is Yan and I'm asking you to help me raise funds for my research on tropes against men in video games. As we all know, the matriarchy holds down men constantly. For example, this can be seen in how men are asked to put their lives in danger to save the women who has power over them, thus signaling that their sole existence in life is to be providers who can be disposed of if necessary. The Mario brothers are plumbers and Peach is a Princess. Class warfare anyone?

I don't particularly like feminists and quite frankly I prefer to avoid any woman using the term to define herself. Feminism isn't about equality (or isn't anymore) as women have acquired a special group status over time and now have gender-specific privileges. While I hesitate to say men are victims, on the other hand it is plainly visible that men are generally seen and portrayed in a negative light such as disposable men, utility men, the myth that most women will be victims (of men)or abused (by men)."

Yes, I can see that fly very well. The white knight parade would be coming non-stop.

Id be more inclined to agree with her if doing so was not synonymous with belief in the patriarchy. Sure you say there is sexism and a lot of people who can't behave themselves on the internet but I do not think that this means there is an organised and consistent attempt to keep women at some sort of subservient level. That sounds like a conspiracy theory.

There is of course the having a conclusion and then searching for evidence to match it, inherently biased research. Also how her own thesis leaves her hilariously incapable of making strong female characters without contradicting herself and only used video games most recently as a money pit. It still feels like as much scam today as I thought it seemed back on kick starter.

IceForce:

Johnny Novgorod:

Folksoul:
No, Anita isn't wrong, for the most part. She's just making her point in the most boring way possible.

Yep. Heart in the right place, boring ass videos.

I always found this to be an odd complaint.

She never set out to thrill and entertain. She set out to educate and inform.

Do you complain about university lectures being "boring"?

Usually, most people won't be bored when learning something interesting,new or challenging. Anita does not present any information, especially to male gamers, that has not already been force-fed to men during their life.

Actually they do. There have been several big Kickstarter fails where people have accused developers of doing just that.

Yes, but Anita has produced the product people wanted and paid for. It may not have cost nearly as much as was donated to her cause but that's the downside of Kickstarter. Let the donator beware is something well known about it.

It's not a charity OR an investment. It's a donation.

Actually her own words in the past were "I'm not very familiar with gaming" now she's switched from that to claiming she is a gamer. OK fine. The problem is if you then try to speak for all gamers of a certain demographic, without the knowledge or experience to show that demographic in their true light.

She's speaking of TV tropes as a serious academic source. Also, she has, usually, like 40 games cited (correctly) everytime she posts them. I'm an academic in real life and an English professor and this passes thesis quality.

I'm not a Viking but I wrote mine on Beowulf by having 20+ sources.

The problem is EA see this as a way to get easy cash and aren't taking the message on board as intended they are seemingly going "Oh so if we stick this tacked on bit here we can get more girls to buy the game too" instead of looking at the actual issues such a lack of female leads to an extent and better written character (not just female ones.

People fear the companies knee jerk reaction to this because of the attention she's got. [See EA discovering how well microtransactions were doing on mobile games

I dunno, I think "tacked on bits" can be pretty good. Take Claire Redfield's role in Resident Evil 2. The game could have starred Leon Kennedy alone (like RA4 did) without much change. Likewise, you could have tacked on Claire to RA4 with only some dialogue changes.

It'd still have given female gamers better representation.

IceForce:

Johnny Novgorod:

Folksoul:
No, Anita isn't wrong, for the most part. She's just making her point in the most boring way possible.

Yep. Heart in the right place, boring ass videos.

I always found this to be an odd complaint.

She never set out to thrill and entertain. She set out to educate and inform.

Do you complain about university lectures being "boring"?

I've studied under enough teachers to know just because you're imparting knowledge doesn't mean you have to be boring about it. Anita's videos are unfocused, reiterative, way too long and quite dull. Contrast that with say a documentary about sexual assault in the USA military, which features gut-wrenching subject matter yet manages to be focused, concise, well paced and yes, entertaining as in not boring.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Invisible_War

I.Muir:
Id be more inclined to agree with her if doing so was not synonymous with belief in the patriarchy. Sure you say there is sexism and a lot of people who can't behave themselves on the internet but I do not think that this means there is an organised and consistent attempt to keep women at some sort of subservient level. That sounds like a conspiracy theory.

There is of course the having a conclusion and then searching for evidence to match it, inherently biased research. Also how her own thesis leaves her hilariously incapable of making strong female characters without contradicting herself and only used video games most recently as a money pit. It still feels like as much scam today as I thought it seemed back on kick starter.

To put this in video game terms, one does not have to believe in Deus Ex's Illuminati or RE's Umbrella Corporation to believe there is a extremely close knit network of political corruption and corporate exploitation making life more difficult for your average American.

No, there doesn't have to be an organized campaign to keep women down at an institutional level for there to be assumptions which make things **** for women interested in geeky hobbies. It's been mentioned here in this thread that they think, "Video game developers should cater to men because men are the primary market."

This becomes self-reinforcing as people attempt to appeal to men because they assume men are the audience. This can lead to games like Dead of Alive Beach Volleyball, which AREN'T necessary bad. There's nothing wrong with catering to males with sex appeal (and there should be no shame in that). However, that sort of thing is rampant in lots and lots and LOTS of games with no thought to how it affects female gamers.

And it's EVERYWHERE. You have to play Saints Row or Mass Effect or Fallout to play a female character.

Charles Phipps:

Actually they do. There have been several big Kickstarter fails where people have accused developers of doing just that.

Yes, but Anita has produced the product people wanted and paid for. It may not have cost nearly as much as was donated to her cause but that's the downside of Kickstarter. Let the donator beware is something well known about it.

It's not a charity OR an investment. It's a donation.

True but it doesn't mean people can do what they like with it. I mean when it was discovered children in need had shares in a military arms company. Wow did that go down badly with all those who donated over the years.

Charles Phipps:

Actually her own words in the past were "I'm not very familiar with gaming" now she's switched from that to claiming she is a gamer. OK fine. The problem is if you then try to speak for all gamers of a certain demographic, without the knowledge or experience to show that demographic in their true light.

She's speaking of TV tropes as a serious academic source. Also, she has, usually, like 40 games cited (correctly) everytime she posts them. I'm an academic in real life and an English professor and this passes thesis quality.

I thought TV tropes wasn't eligible as a source due to the fact like wikipedia it's publicly editable. also i'd hardly say its thesis level considering it's not Harvard referenced. You could maybe get away with it if you were claiming ACS but even that needs more detail normally.

Charles Phipps:

I'm not a Viking but I wrote mine on Beowulf by having 20+ sources.

Thus proving you can give an opinion upon something without being directly involved in its scope you can choose to be involved. What you pointed out there is pretty much what people have been saying. Why aren't guys allowed a say in this too ? Why must this be a one way discussion on it ?

Charles Phipps:

The problem is EA see this as a way to get easy cash and aren't taking the message on board as intended they are seemingly going "Oh so if we stick this tacked on bit here we can get more girls to buy the game too" instead of looking at the actual issues such a lack of female leads to an extent and better written character (not just female ones.

People fear the companies knee jerk reaction to this because of the attention she's got. [See EA discovering how well microtransactions were doing on mobile games

I dunno, I think "tacked on bits" can be pretty good. Take Claire Redfield's role in Resident Evil 2. The game could have starred Leon Kennedy alone (like RA4 did) without much change. Likewise, you could have tacked on Claire to RA4 with only some dialogue changes.
It'd still have given female gamers better representation.

[/quote]
I'm unfortunately not talking adding Claire's missions I mean EA doing something truly dumb like I dunno "Pink Rainbow Pony fashion pack for BF4" or some such fashion / style orientated thing In a misguided attempt to appeal to female by including what it believe they want.

Charles Phipps:

It'd still have given female gamers better representation.

This line leads unfortunately on to a huge can of worms which I'll summarise now and someone else can open fully.

If by adding in more female characters it's better representing female gamers, operating under the assumption that people want to play a character of their own gender then we hit an issue.
The main demographic for games is male, at last estimate 60% male.
While companies do want to have mass appeal they will also target the main demographic.
Thus by this approach companies will be able to justify not having female leads on the grounds that they are after the main demographic.

The true reason to have a female main character in a game is because that's part of the vision of the game. If female characters are put in as almost a token then it can stick out. Not every game needs to have a female main. Now before someone flies off on it representing female gamers, if you do want to argue this then you are also arguing for Larry Croft. Who is Larry Croft ? Well he's the hypothetical male version of Lara Croft who should be included so he represents male gamers allowing them an option in a female led game.

It brings up the question if people will only play as a character their own gender, why should a company shoot themselves in the foot by only making a game that can appeal to at maximum 40% of gamers.

Obviously most of that is false I mean guys will play as female characters as much as girls will play as male ones. The issue arises when people want to force this and actually get quite aggressive as was seen when the Puppeteer was found to have no option to play as a female lead character.

This line leads unfortunately on to a huge can of worms which I'll summarise now and someone else can open fully.

If by adding in more female characters it's better representing female gamers, operating under the assumption that people want to play a character of their own gender then we hit an issue.
The main demographic for games is male, at last estimate 60% male.
While companies do want to have mass appeal they will also target the main demographic.
Thus by this approach companies will be able to justify not having female leads on the grounds that they are after the main demographic.

This is where I get with the idea of self-reinforcing issues. By appealing to the male demographic without the female demographic, they run the risk of alienating that 40% market and certainly not making it grow. No, FemShep is not nearly as popular as MaleShep but that doesn't mean that FemShep didn't have extremely devoted fans and people didn't enjoy playing her (particularly women).

I love comic book shops. However, I don't think people are talking out of their butts when they think covering them in scantily glad women from head to toe may not make female comic book fans feel welcome.

And yet, if you go over to many comic book sites, they complain about females not reading enough comics.

Charles Phipps:

I.Muir:
Id be more inclined to agree with her if doing so was not synonymous with belief in the patriarchy. Sure you say there is sexism and a lot of people who can't behave themselves on the internet but I do not think that this means there is an organised and consistent attempt to keep women at some sort of subservient level. That sounds like a conspiracy theory.

There is of course the having a conclusion and then searching for evidence to match it, inherently biased research. Also how her own thesis leaves her hilariously incapable of making strong female characters without contradicting herself and only used video games most recently as a money pit. It still feels like as much scam today as I thought it seemed back on kick starter.

To put this in video game terms, one does not have to believe in Deus Ex's Illuminati or RE's Umbrella Corporation to believe there is a extremely close knit network of political corruption and corporate exploitation making life more difficult for your average American.

No, there doesn't have to be an organized campaign to keep women down at an institutional level for there to be assumptions which make things **** for women interested in geeky hobbies. It's been mentioned here in this thread that they think, "Video game developers should cater to men because men are the primary market."

This becomes self-reinforcing as people attempt to appeal to men because they assume men are the audience. This can lead to games like Dead of Alive Beach Volleyball, which AREN'T necessary bad. There's nothing wrong with catering to males with sex appeal (and there should be no shame in that). However, that sort of thing is rampant in lots and lots and LOTS of games with no thought to how it affects female gamers.

And it's EVERYWHERE. You have to play Saints Row or Mass Effect or Fallout to play a female character.

I'm not American but I know the government is defiantly making my life more difficult, bloody Abbot.

However one theory implies deliberate and malicious intent, the other Id say is a by product of financing being old dinosaurs who can't adapt to change. I'd say more but that does not have to do with video games so is too unrelated and some would say the same is true visa verse.

The change is that more women are playing these games where there were little before. The marketing of the modern nerd and big bang theory aside. You can't force publishers to change but in some cases they might be better off and change is welcome in such a stagnant industry. However publishers can't seem to stop themselves from ruining their own franchises so why anybody thinks they are the authority on their own audience is beyond me. Publishers seem to be making a lot of assumptions on my part as to what I want the protagonist to look like I mean after all beyond good and evil is still one of my favorite games. They also appear to only be using 14 year old future frat boys for any focus testing I mean look at what they did to over-strike. On a side note there are also more than just create your own character games with female leads I mean who could forget perfect dark.

In the end the thought process I'm confronted with is;
A)The lack of female protagonists or even lack of variety in any and all characters is symptomatic of a systematic attempt to keep games boys only because of misogyny, the patriarchy deliberate or otherwise holding triumphantly aloft the 70% of gamers are male sign
B)Or games are a business, businesses are slow to change, rarely imaginative and won't finance anything at all without some market research leading them to believe it will sell (rubbish or otherwise - part of the reason they think cod is the end all of games)

You can imagine the conclusion I came up with
Also a little light turns off In my head when people start grouping large numbers of others together, make assumptions about them, spout stereotypes and on occasion put themselves in opposition to them.

Charles Phipps:

This line leads unfortunately on to a huge can of worms which I'll summarise now and someone else can open fully.

If by adding in more female characters it's better representing female gamers, operating under the assumption that people want to play a character of their own gender then we hit an issue.
The main demographic for games is male, at last estimate 60% male.
While companies do want to have mass appeal they will also target the main demographic.
Thus by this approach companies will be able to justify not having female leads on the grounds that they are after the main demographic.

This is where I get with the idea of self-reinforcing issues. By appealing to the male demographic without the female demographic, they run the risk of alienating that 40% market and certainly not making it grow. No, FemShep is not nearly as popular as MaleShep but that doesn't mean that FemShep didn't have extremely devoted fans and people didn't enjoy playing her (particularly women).

That's kind of the point as if they option fits then sure allow the option but if the option doesn't fit then its fine to have a male or female lead depending on the story etc. Saying people won't play a character that isn't their own gender is something that could reinforce the lack of female leads which is kind of ironic considering all the praise that gets given out when a game gets modded to allow a female gamer to play as a female lead.

Charles Phipps:

I love comic book shops. However, I don't think people are talking out of their butts when they think covering them in scantily glad women from head to toe may not make female comic book fans feel welcome.

And yet, if you go over to many comic book sites, they complain about females not reading enough comics.

People aren't entirely however it depends on people tolerances. Now before anyone steps in with the "But you can't possibly experience this as you're male and straight how on earth can you know how this feels ?" I actually went out my way to attempt to find out what this experience is like and forced myself to play two games which pretty much do present a version of this but with dudes. The first being "my ex boyfriend the Space Tyrant a gay adventure game" which stars half naked guys walking round in underpants, tight shorts and speedos complete with bouncing motion of a certain part as they walk. the other game being "mount your friends" notable as being one of the few games with member physics, that's it bounces around as they move. Now initially I did experience that repulsion, so I can understand where this comes from. However and here's the key point, I found I was able to look past it after I had let it settle in and was able to play the game without it being a major issue. Heck when companies blatantly try to sell with sex they are actively mocked. the idea of the chainmail bikini is now a running joke and in a lot of games incidents of trying these tactics are pointed out and shown as the terrible practices they are.

There's the thing, though.

Patriarchy as a concept works not because of "A" but because of "B."

Gloria Steinem, Patron Saint of Feminism, said the big issue when confronting sexism in the world was the fact that whenever she wanted to talk about making it easier for women to get into the workplace--the general reaction was that people assumed she was accusing them of being a secret cabal of oppressing women or she had a crazy agenda to overthrow men and put women in their place.

Basically, feminism wasn't as threatening as change period. Though she got plenty of the former too.

Publishers make sexist games because of $$$, not because of misogyny. However, unless people like Miss Saarkesian bring to light that A:] Girls play games too. B:] Girls don't like this stuff. Then they're likely to continue making sexist games because of the $$$.

In short, slow to change won't happen if publishers aren't given a reason to change or are told to change. It's part of the reason it's damn near impossible to get women to read comics now as they've doubled down while the movies and spin-offs have expanded their market.

Now initially I did experience that repulsion, so I can understand where this comes from. However and here's the key point, I found I was able to look past it after I had let it settle in and was able to play the game without it being a major issue. Heck when companies blatantly try to sell with sex they are actively mocked. the idea of the chainmail bikini is now a running joke and in a lot of games incidents of trying these tactics are pointed out and shown as the terrible practices they are.

I dunno. Chainmail bikinis are mocked but have you seen the outfits for women characters in plenty of fighting games?

It's actually the heart of the whole "Dragon Crown" controversy. Dragon Crown is a fantasy based game which is perfectly capable of appealing to both men and women. However, for no real reason, they threw in all of the blatant pandering to male gamers and that actually caused a lot of people to be turned off.

Yeah, EA and other publishers may decide not to make female protagonists because of this--but is that more likely than the reverse?

There's also no reason not to be gender positive than negative. "Beyond Good and Evil" sold like ass but it was a great game. Showing game developers you want to play characters like Lara Croft NOT just because of her short-shorts and chestt size and so on but because you like them is as important as saying, "this game is sexist."

Say what we like as much as what we don't.

This was significantly more interesting than your normal show. Your commentary was insightful and interesting and you should do this more often.

Charles Phipps:
There's the thing, though.

Patriarchy as a concept works not because of "A" but because of "B."

Gloria Steinem, Patron Saint of Feminism, said the big issue when confronting sexism in the world was the fact that whenever she wanted to talk about making it easier for women to get into the workplace--the general reaction was that people assumed she was accusing them of being a secret cabal of oppressing women or she had a crazy agenda to overthrow men and put women in their place.

Publishers make sexist games because of $$$, not because of misogyny. However, unless people like Miss Saarkesian bring to light that A:] Girls play games too. B:] Girls don't like this stuff. Then they're likely to continue making sexist games because of the $$$.

In short, slow to change won't happen if publishers aren't given a reason to change or are told to change. It's part of the reason it's damn near impossible to get women to read comics now as they've doubled down while the movies and spin-offs have expanded their market.

The problem is while people thought Gloria Steinem was accusing them of that Anita Sarkeesian has accused people of that in her videos with the comments about retrogressive attitudes that are holding back equality. Basically "anyone who doesn't have this opinion which is the progressive one is part of the problem"meaning even if you support aspects of the game for an entirely different reason and aren't in any way condoning Women being oppressed you are still just as bad. That's where Anita Sarkeesian has hit a problem. It does come off as an attack on the industry or those who enjoy it. No matter how much its then justified as being fine to enjoy the media if you've already said the media itself is bad and people who like it are bad then its like throwing an insult only to say "no offence" after it.

The problem is

1) People know girls play games too by this point. It's not news anymore. It's not something to be held up high as girls are human beings too not strange alien god like creatures. This is kind of the issue with the idea of a girl gamer vs a girl who plays games. As some, and I mean a very small minority think they deserve special treatment because they're a girl who plays games. As I said a very small minority think this but they are a big problem a running into them can set some people off against girl gamers due to generalising them based on one encounter. Heck you could extend this to ask if the Frag dolls a girls only gamer organisation / clan could be making this worse by splitting girl gamers off and not simply having a whole community of gamers, male or female.

2) Publishers need a clear picture of what is ok and to an extent people need to realise sexualisation is ok.......... now there's a shocking concept. True equality in gaming will be when both genders are part of sexualised marketing campaigns not just one. Here's a legitimate quote from a female gamer I used to know "I think Snake's hot, he has a nice Arse. I mean think about it, most of any metal Gear Solid game is staring at Snakes arse after all"

This firewall you guys speak of. Are you referring to how she disables comments on her videos? Random internet commenters that accuse all her critics of misogyny?

From my observations, other than what I just mentioned, there exists no censor on criticism, whether fair or unfair, of Sarkeesian. Plenty of people on Youtube, news sites, blogs, forums, and the like have expressed similar discontent with her way of doing things. :/ I mean, that doesn't mean there won't be criticism, both fair and unfair, of THAT criticism in turn, but such is the nature of debate and the internet.

Does anyone else really feel there's widespread suppression of Sarkeesian's critics?

Panda Mania:
This firewall you guys speak of. Are you referring to how she disables comments on her videos? Random internet commenters that accuse all her critics of misogyny?

From my observations, other than what I just mentioned, there exists no censor on criticism, whether fair or unfair, of Sarkeesian. Plenty of people on Youtube, news sites, blogs, forums, and the like have expressed similar discontent with her way of doing things. :/ I mean, that doesn't mean there won't be criticism, both fair and unfair, of THAT criticism in turn, but such is the nature of debate and the internet.

Does anyone else really feel there's widespread suppression of Sarkeesian's critics?

Everytime she posts, Youtube is filled with dozens of rebuttal pieces to her work.

Heh bravo, I have to say this probably is the first time at seeing level headed people actually critical of her, so comments well deserved,

And I do feel there is widespread suppression of sarkeesian's critics because I haven't seen anyone speak out against her not be labeled the devil, hell people here are already insulting them on honest points like what did she need 6k for?

But anyway it's been months and It doesn't feel like she did anything of note but cause drama.

47% of the American Population of gamers is female. Most of them play social or mobile games. They reach near equity in Nintendo products, and is a vast minority in 360, PS3, "hardcore" PC gaming. If you are looking for genres such as adventrue titles, sim, and puzzles you'll find most of them is female dominated, the Wii Fits and rhythm games also hold a large female audience. Once you start going into action, fighting, shooting, and so forth it is the reversal. You guys do realize that right? Most of the female gamers show no interest in what the males are playing to a large margin. When you guys talk about the game industry not catering to females, you're particularly talking about the male market in game industry not catering towards female gamers. The same is more than likely true in other regions. Most of female gaming population doesn't show a interest in what male gamers are playing, doesn't mean that there is a problem.

Losanme:

The ESA numbers might be true in the most liberal sense of the word, but everyone has to remember that they are provided by a lobbying body of the industry (which also stood up for things like SOPA in the past in the name of said industry, even though separate publishers when pressed on it would either say a different thing or not answer at all) that is supposed to make the entire Gaming Industry look good and presented in a misleading way without providing any further details.

The same study for instance also says:
"89% of the time parents are present when games are purchased or rented"
"80% of the time children receive their parents' permission before purchasing or renting a game"
"93% of parents pay attention to the content of the games their children play"
If you believe this, I have a bridge to sell you.

http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/WandaMeloni/20100330/87019/The_Next_Frontier__Female_Gaming_Demographics.php
http://www.datagenetics.com/blog/december12010/index.html
http://psychology.wichita.edu/surl/usabilitynews/141/videogames.asp
http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/06/03/96-percent-of-eve-online-players-are-male/
http://www.goodluckhavefun.net/league-of-legends-infographic/
http://www.casualnews.com/the-demographics-of-social-games-surprise-or-not/
http://readwrite.com/2013/04/11/why-mobile-game-developers-are-on-the-cusp-of-a-golden-age

If you look through these you will notice that the split between games differs a lot, especially based on type of game and genre.
"Core" games like GTA, Call of Duty, Battlefield and similar that sell in the millions at retail and set up new records every year, even outdoing the movie industry are mostly male-led.
CoD is 92% male, League of Legends is over 90% male, GTA IV is 85% male, EVE Online is even 96% male.
These games largely cater to their market, which are males usually between 12-30 years old.

(Notice how for instance how EVE Online or League of Legends had female character options and female champions from the get-go and this didn't particularly help them garnering more of those demographics.)

On the other hand games like Bejeweled, Treasure Isle, Country Story, Happy Pets or YoVille with ~80% or Farmville and Restaurant City with ~70% female players are female-led.
Most big publishers have female-led franchises that cater specifically to that demographic, EA for instance has The Sims, their Harry Potter games series, Bejeweled, The Sims Social, Pet Society and similar.
http://gigaom.com/2010/02/17/average-social-gamer-is-a-43-year-old-woman/

The Sims and The Sims 2 are both in the Top 3 of the best-selling PC games of all times with The Sims 3 not far behind and rather far up on the list best-selling video games of all times. They cater largely to women.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/ea-women-too-big-an-audience-to-ignore-6169357

Contrary to popular belief games like Dragon Age or Mass Effect aren't played by that many women though, no matter how hard they might try to appeal to said market and they still have over 80% male demographics: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-07-20-bioware-18-percent-play-mass-effect-as-femshep
http://cdn2.gamefront.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/mass-effect-3-infographic.jpg

UbiSoft has games like Just Dance, Your Shape, Petz, their Imagine and My Coach series (those are rather large, further games that get utterly ignored): http://www.commonsensemedia.org/game-lists/imagine-games-girls
Exploratory Adventure games like Myst/Uru have also been rather successful with that demographic in the past and there are still a healthy dose of those around: http://www.minotdailynews.com/page/blogs.detail/display/1000/Women-play-as-many-video-games-as-men.html
http://www.sophiageorge.com/uploads/7/4/7/6/7476345/engaging_women_in_games_using_emotional_stimuli.pdf

Adventure games in general have a wider female audience, see for instance The Blackwell Series, The Longest Journey/Dreamfall, Emerald City Confidential, Secret Files Series, Haunted, Gray Matter, Syberia Series, Nancy Drew Series, Still Life Series, Broken Sword Series, Edna & Harvey Series, A Vamypre Story, Winter Voices, To The Moon etc.
As well as the largest number of Hidden Object games: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Npu8xQDxS4

Don't get caught in the trap of saying that game publishers "aren't trying" to make money or wouldn't go for a specific market if there was money in it, because they do regularly and a lot of these products prove that. They just find out that in financial terms gender specific games that many feminists might theoretically not agree with sell very well to girls/women, while games with a high amount of action and violence and "core" AAA games generally don't.

This isn't "sexism". It is simple business and common fucking sense. The genders are generally speaking different enough to want different things. Catering to your main market instead of retooling your game to appeal to an entirely different demographic or turning the games into a homogenized mess that the main market would never buy is what more publishers and game developers should be doing, not less. (Notice how big games like GTA, Call of Duty, Hitman and similar usually get the brunt of the complaints of having to change.)

Other games that are generally overlooked in these talking points are lower profile Indie games like Contrast, 99 Spirits, Lilly Looking Through, Memoria, Game Dev Tycoon, Assault Android Cactus, SpeedRunners, Hate Plus etc. that never get brought up.
Not to talk about games only showing up on even lesser known game distribution methods like Desura, iOS/Android or on Casual game portals.

There even exists a subset of Japanese games that basically boil down to being romance games for a young female audience:
http://www.englishotomegames.net/list

Very few if any of these seem to ever show up on thorough lists regarding female protagonists in games like the ones on Mobygames or Giantbomb, since they are utterly ignored: http://www.mobygames.com/game-group/protagonist-female
http://www.giantbomb.com/female-protagonists/3015-2287/games/

Yet a small bit of the industry that largely coincides with the console AAA market and makes up what is possibly 5-10% of the entire Steam games released nowadays at the most seem to always be the only thing that get looked at in these cases.

It's not even that the "AAA" industry didn't try, there are also a lot of examples of AAA-ish games out there with female protagonists: Oni, Mirror's Edge, Beyond Good & Evil ( http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/129370-Ubisoft-Considers-Beyond-Good-Evil-a-Mistake ), WET, Velvet Assassin, Heavenly Sword, No One Lives Forever I+II, Remember Me (a very recent commercial failure), Zanzarah, Venetica, American McGee's Alice, The Wheel of Time, Drakan, Bayonetta, Hydrophobia etc.

Aside from Tomb Raider (which sold extremely well on its sex-appeal when it was a fresh franchise), Portal (with a silent protagonist) and Metroid (which is basically a robot game and at the end it is revealed that the pilot is actually female) none of these games sold "AAA" numbers and none of them could develop into a franchise, which seems awfully important for most big publishers nowadays.

Arguing that "core" games with a 90%+ male market buying them need to change because a large amount of women are playing what amounts to a majority of Casual, Facebook and Mobile games is stupid.
Arguing that Social/Casual games need to change and offer more Space Marine and Modern Warfare variety because a large amount of men are playing "core" games would be equally stupid.

And before more people start arguing demographics, marketing and prejudices, one of the articles made a very good point, which is that you can even easily conclude to a product by just looking at its demographics data alone (which you can as easily apply to games):
image

Charles Phipps:
There's the thing, though.

Patriarchy as a concept works not because of "A" but because of "B."

Gloria Steinem, Patron Saint of Feminism, said the big issue when confronting sexism in the world was the fact that whenever she wanted to talk about making it easier for women to get into the workplace--the general reaction was that people assumed she was accusing them of being a secret cabal of oppressing women or she had a crazy agenda to overthrow men and put women in their place.

Basically, feminism wasn't as threatening as change period. Though she got plenty of the former too.

Publishers make sexist games because of $$$, not because of misogyny. However, unless people like Miss Saarkesian bring to light that A:] Girls play games too. B:] Girls don't like this stuff. Then they're likely to continue making sexist games because of the $$$.

In short, slow to change won't happen if publishers aren't given a reason to change or are told to change. It's part of the reason it's damn near impossible to get women to read comics now as they've doubled down while the movies and spin-offs have expanded their market.

There are two flaws to that formula. First, it assumes that Anita speaks for all women potential gamers, and that if she says these tropes are keeping women from playing, then that is gospel. Second, well, let's look at something. Remember Me was a game with a female lead that nearly didn't get made because publishers didn't think the female lead would sell. This created a big outcry online of how dare they deny a game with a female lead on such a flimsy claim. How'd that translate sales wise? Since it's release in June, it's sold about 110,000 units in north america across 3 systems according to VGchatz.com. Not really that great for something so many are supposedly clamoring for. Now look at the opposite: Dragon's Crown was a game with a highly stylized character with very large breasts. The game had a backlash of very strong criticism and calls for boycotts. It has sold since August about 260,000 units over 2 systems. So the game everyone wanted sold less copies despite being on more systems and out longer. Something doesn't add up.

Of course you get the excuses about Remember Me reviewing poorly, which on it's own, makes sense, but it gets added to other excuses. My own collection has over 30 games bought in 2013 with either a female lead, or choice of female lead, numerous female side characters, or customizable parties including gender preferences. Most of those being JRPGs however makes them not count to a lot of people. I've heard dismissals because they don't have the system, ot the game didn't get a big marketing push and other reasons. Imagine your confusion as a game maker wanting to appeal to a female demographic, but finding a list of excuses why they didn't buy what they said they wanted while buying Grand Theft Auto 5 dispite being mad about the lack of a playable woman.

No one is keeping women out of gaming. They just aren't jumping at the idea of putting their bottom line at risk for requests that seem inconsistent with what their marketing department says they're actually buying. Anita's tropes vidoes don't speak for all women so much as they're just a list of her pet peeves in fiction, but even if not, there's a strong desire to blame the "boy's club" rather than ask if women are being the demographic companies want to support, and buying things that support their values. You're right, companies won't change without a reason to do so, but few will take a limited view of one woman as a particularly good reason.

I think Anita is simply a psychologist/sociologist. When I say this, I mean she has simply pointed out something that people pretty much already knew was occurring and she basically said, "Hey, did you ever notice this thing?" The problem I have with her is that is where her discussion tends to end. She has rarely brought up counterpoints to her examples and has not presented any sort of critical analysis or in depth suggested solution. To be truly worth the hubbub, she needs to do more with her time.

bdcjacko:

Why does that cause such an epidemic of hate and internet flaming?

Before or after the accusations of gamers being responsible for the "harassment"? Before i properly prepare your ass for debate, you will need to read this: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/?page=full

Because i fully expect that Confirmation Bias and Cognitive Dissonance will come to your aid, when your brain starts to process the facts that i will represent to you.

Now, why did i say harassment in quotations? because:

1)There is evidence of her being ACTUALLY AWARE of 4chan existence before the Kickstarter. Yet she acts surprised when the poking the nest of bees ends up with *gasp* consequences.

2)The post on 4Chan that lured all the angry people was posted on the same day the Kickstarter started:
http://archive.foolz.us/v/thread/139813364

Notice the date of the post. It says: "Thu May 17 2012 20:40:00"

Which day was that? why, its the same day that Kickstarter started of course:
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/566429325/tropes-vs-women-in-video-games?ref=card
"Funding period - May 17, 2012 - Jun 16, 2012 (30 days)"

So let me get this straight: The trolls, somehow, found out about the Kickstarter ON THE SAME DAY IT BEGAN, posted it on 4Chan to rally more people, and then started to flood the comment section? Damn, those are the fastest motherfuckers ever. Or, you know, it was Anita and her group.

3)There is evidence to suggest that 4Chan didn't even care about Anita anyway, and probably White Knight her:

4)And even if 4Chan lied and they DID harass her when the Kickstarter happened, it doesn't matter anymore because the comment section was closed and all the comments are gone. The evidence for her harassment (and the rest of the comments that were criticism) is now gone forever. All we have is her word, and if there are screenshots of it then most likely will comments handpicked to just focus on the hate (which would be 10% of the original total number of comments), rather than ALL comments.

Look at it, the comments are GONE:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8I0Wy58adM

5)Given the nature of The Internet, which grants anonymity to EVERYONE, how can we know the people behind the comments were, as Anita puts it: "White male gamers in their basements". Which is a very incriminating statement without actual evidence backing it up?
Here is the TEDxTalk video of her saying it:

For all we know, there could have been other feminist giving her shit, since her work more or less goes against mainstream feminism and equality:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/YMMV/FeministFrequency

For example, her Master Thesis (named: "I WILL MAKE A MAN OUT OF YOU") even suggest that women acting like men (or equal to men) is not good, and should act this way instead: http://puu.sh/2dZ4i

So its not surprising that other Feminist would act in anger towards the person that everyone keep lauding as THE face of Feminism. Its like saying that The Amazing Atheist is THE face of Atheism. There is going to be objections to both statements in a very furious manner.

6)For all the criticism people makes against her work, journalists and other high profile people just flat out IGNORE their efforts. Even if the people making the criticism are women AND developers:
https://twitter.com/Bendilin/status/414983157314629632/photo/1

7)Her lack of siting sources for her "Academic Research" reassembles the techniques of other people who made claims without facts in hand, and abused its power to change an industry:
http://io9.com/5985199/how-one-mans-lies-almost-destroyed-the-comics-industry

It just hits too many strokes to not find her a problem to be solved ASAP. Here is my favorite line from him: "A physician is not at liberty to divulge his sources."

8)She claims in the Kickstarter that: "Your support will go towards production costs, equipment, *game*s and downloadable content." If that is the case, then why did she stole footage of Let's Plays?:
http://victorsopinion.blogspot.com.ar/2013/07/anitas-sources.html

Your answer would be: "To make the research cheaper, you dummy! Games take a lot of effort to complete, and she only needs a few key moments in the games. She doesn't NEED to play or buy the games when she can get the footage for free"

But that defeats the purpose of ASKING for money for research, isn't it? specially if she said that she was going to use the money FOR the purchase of games. If she was going for a cheaper route, why do all this? buying the games would be money wasted since the Internet can give you the material for FREE.

But then there is this: http://evfxonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/sarkeesian-video-games.jpg
So she bought the games....yet she STILL has to get footage from OTHERS, instead of using the games she already wasted money on? Pragmatism isn't even in play here, since she could have just used the free footage and not buy the games. That would be inteligent. Instead we have this scenario that mystifies people.

It just raises too many questions. She already has the equipment long before the Kickstarter, the video quality is the same, and doesn't even play the game she already has and opts for a cheap way out. Where did the money go?

9)Due to Nº7 and the constant praising of her actions by the journalists and everyone else, to the point of consider her a saint or a martyr...

...everyone else just gave up on legitimate criticism and started to harass her for real, or just try to dig her past to debunk her saintly image. Cause lets face it, if no one listens to you no matter how right you are on her lack of sources that her claims NEEDS in order to be sustained, and they still accuse you of a monster, what choice do you have?

10)She complains about the game where she gets beat up as a misogynist act, yet she fails to notice how the fanfic she endorses, on her OWN BLOG, has her killing Randy Pitchford with several shots of a gun.
http://femfreq.tumblr.com/post/58161053721/spider-man-recruits-the-help-of-anita-sarkeesian-to

So someone making a game where she gets beaten up, because they think she is a con-artist, is a no no, but killing in cold blood a person whose crimes are similar (conning people out of their money with Aliens Colonial Marines) is ok as long its not her? or maybe because its a man getting shot/hurt/killed is ok.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MenAreTheExpendableGender

---

How lazy do you have to be, that even after more than a year people STILL need to explain all what happened?

Can you now comprehend a fraction of why everyone is pissed off? we were just fine until someone accused them of being monsters without evidence, and used "academic presentations" with dubious facts to say that their hobby is evil.

No wonder why people signed this petition to have SOMEONE listen to them:
www.thepetitionsite.com/415/777/451/acknowledge-and-present-legitimate-criticism-of-anita-sarkeesian/

Charles Phipps:
There's the thing, though.

Patriarchy as a concept works not because of "A" but because of "B."

Gloria Steinem, Patron Saint of Feminism, said the big issue when confronting sexism in the world was the fact that whenever she wanted to talk about making it easier for women to get into the workplace--the general reaction was that people assumed she was accusing them of being a secret cabal of oppressing women or she had a crazy agenda to overthrow men and put women in their place.

Basically, feminism wasn't as threatening as change period. Though she got plenty of the former too.

Publishers make sexist games because of $$$, not because of misogyny. However, unless people like Miss Saarkesian bring to light that A:] Girls play games too. B:] Girls don't like this stuff. Then they're likely to continue making sexist games because of the $$$.

In short, slow to change won't happen if publishers aren't given a reason to change or are told to change. It's part of the reason it's damn near impossible to get women to read comics now as they've doubled down while the movies and spin-offs have expanded their market.

Explain this to me then. If Feminism is soooooooo innocent, then why this woman got death threats for saying that "women are equally as capable of violence as men"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erin_Pizzey

Also explain this: "CURRENT CONTROVERSIES AND PREVALENCE CONCERNING FEMALE OFFENDERS OF INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE - Why the Overwhelming Evidence on Partner Physical Violence Has Not Been Perceived and Is Often Denied"
http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V75-Straus-09.pdf

I would triple check the claims of Feminism if i were you.

JellySlimerMan:
Explain this to me then. If Feminism is soooooooo innocent, then why this woman got death threats for saying that "women are equally as capable of violence as men"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erin_Pizzey

Also explain this: "CURRENT CONTROVERSIES AND PREVALENCE CONCERNING FEMALE OFFENDERS OF INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE - Why the Overwhelming Evidence on Partner Physical Violence Has Not Been Perceived and Is Often Denied"
http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V75-Straus-09.pdf

I would triple check the claims of Feminism if i were you.

Are you actually cherry picking examples like this when we live in a world with folk like the Taliban shooting Malala and other actions? Yeah, we can say that, but if you're actually going to say feminism (the belief men and women are equal) is not a positive force--well, I think that's crazy.

There are two flaws to that formula. First, it assumes that Anita speaks for all women potential gamers, and that if she says these tropes are keeping women from playing, then that is gospel. Second, well, let's look at something. Remember Me was a game with a female lead that nearly didn't get made because publishers didn't think the female lead would sell. This created a big outcry online of how dare they deny a game with a female lead on such a flimsy claim. How'd that translate sales wise? Since it's release in June, it's sold about 110,000 units in north america across 3 systems according to VGchatz.com. Not really that great for something so many are supposedly clamoring for. Now look at the opposite: Dragon's Crown was a game with a highly stylized character with very large breasts. The game had a backlash of very strong criticism and calls for boycotts. It has sold since August about 260,000 units over 2 systems. So the game everyone wanted sold less copies despite being on more systems and out longer. Something doesn't add up.

I purchased "Remember Me" and returned it.

Not for ideological reasons.

No, because the game was crap.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here