No Right Answer: Is Anita Sarkeesian Wrong?

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

Magenera:

Losanme:
.

How do you keep quoting this post when the thread the post is from is dead?

(Click the username of the following quote to see:)

Losanme:

Re: Remember Me

No, seriously, games with great writing and gameplay will sell whether there's a female protagonist or not. Compare "Tomb Raider" and "Remember Me", it's not just the difference between Lara Croft and the female protagonist but also the fact Remember Me's cyberpunk aesthetic was nice but ultimately one-dimensional while the combat was a warmed-over Arkham Asylum at best (and Captain America: Super Soldier--shameless movie tie-in was STILL more fun).

No, female protagonists won't magically sell more games. You have to make them as good as the good male ones as there's plenty of male protagonist games which are crap too.

It's terrible Remember Me had to go to elaborate lengths to get published because it had a female protagonist. It's also terrible they didn't make a game worth playing.

SoulChaserJ:
You guys need to re-do this episode with a woman against and one for the argument. You two basically disagreeing does nothing to stop the blatant white knighting on Anita's behalf.

Because only women are allowed to have opinions about gender-issues.

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.

* 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.

*that's an issue I haven't looked into yet.

*The hobby/culture/industry is not one big pool. It is multi-faceted. If you just play Xbox then you're not as qualified to talk about Sony's policies as someone who exclusively uses a PlayStation. It's a variation of street-cred.

*Thanks to the initial reaction of her Kickstarter, Anita is closely connected to the increased discussion about gender-roles & equality within video games. There is a knee-jerk reaction whenever someone starts telling you your business. Combine that with the usual maturity levels found on the Internet & you can see the results.

Charles Phipps:

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?

Dont look at me, i am not part of an organizations that thinks that gathering money to help FICTIONAL women in distress is a top priority over the real ones. Just saying.

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.

Wrong as expected. You are defending the IDEA of Feminism (the belief men and women are equal), not the REALITY of Feminism.

That is the thing, you see. You people are defending Anita JUST BECAUSE she is a Feminist, and you work under the assumption that this version of Feminism IS about "the belief men and women are equal".

Here is something simple for you to do: Can you spot the equality in this table made by Anita in her Master Thesis?:
http://puu.sh/2dZ4i

And it goes all downhill from there. Hell, the Ms.Male character more or less shows that she doesn't want women to be equal to men. The whole premise of her complain is that the characters that she puts under the buss are THE SAME as their male counterparts but with feminine traits just enough to differentiate. Without the cosmetics, they are basically equal in every way:

Also, if you haven't noticed, Malala Yousafzai was inspired to do her crusade by her father who wants equal rights (not Feminism itself). At 3:00

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/malala-yousafzai-shooting
http://www.examiner.com/article/pakistani-girl-malala-yousafzai-runner-up-for-nobel-peace-prize
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/10/18/taliban-shooting-survivor-malala-yousafzai-meets-queen/

The sheer number of offenses and failures of Feminism VASTLY outweighs any positive trait that might justify its existence. But please let these 2 women and 2 dudes tell you in detail. And remember, if your head hurts, then you are doing well: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/?page=full

And no, you dont get to pull the TL;DW excuse. You really expect that a serious problem like Feminism being a wolf in sheep clothing is going to be resolved in a few words? If the material and evidence against is this big, then i guess you got to waste a few hours of your life, assuming that you actually care. Unless, of course, you are the kind of person that only reads what they want to read because it agrees with you and doesn't challenge you, regardless if it is right or wrong.

So tell me, what has Feminism done to help Malala exactly? all i hear is that she is the face of Feminism, but is that a comment made by Malala herself or Feminism is just taking credits like they were responsible for this woman's actions?

Elberik:

*Thanks to the initial reaction of her Kickstarter, Anita is closely connected to the increased discussion about gender-roles & equality within video games.

A discussion that was already being held loooooooooong before she, and her brand of "Feminism", came along.

Case in point, the reaction towards Metroid Other M in 2010. The game that without a shadow of a doubt can be said it IS sexist and misogynistic:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/lb_i.php?lb_id=13373815860B43920100&i_id=13384263550I62094100&p=17
http://moonbase.rydia.net/mental/blog/gaming/metroid-other-m-the-elephant/article.html
http://www.screwattack.com/news/arguments-other-ms-defense-and-why-they-are-all-bullshit

The only people who are tick enough to defend this misogynistic piece of crap are, ironically, the same people that rally with Anita for no apparent reason other than Bandwagon logic. See also MovieBob:

In short: what she says is right.
The way she's doing it is wrong.

IceForce:

Magenera:

Losanme:
.

How do you keep quoting this post when the thread the post is from is dead?

(Click the username of the following quote to see:)

Losanme:

This isn't the first time I brought it up. I have several threads where I used this info, so I just copy paste from other threads that I used. I lost the thread where some guy did the math and if you where to combine both the 360 and PS3 population of ownership in America, females would make up 20%. If this debate comes up again, I would more than likely just used this thread to get the info only if isn't locked. Then I would have to search for a later version.

Magenera:
This isn't the first time I brought it up. I have several threads where I used this info, so I just copy paste from other threads that I used. I lost the thread where some guy did the math and if you where to combine both the 360 and PS3 population of ownership in America, females would make up 20%, which average out to 10% of women in both platforms are owned by women. If this debate comes up again, I would more than likely just used this thread to get the info only if isn't locked. Then I would have to search for a later version.

I just want to correct a big math error there. If 20% of the Xbox's + PS3's are owned by women than on average 20% of the Xbox's and 20% of the PS3's are owned by women, not 10%.

Hmmmmm... Maybe discussion of this topic isn't a good thing on any terms, even as well re-defined as No Right Answer has. It turns every post into gibbering "lol no i got u!" argument fests or people perpetuating the false ideas that you either have to embrace Anita as your lord and saviour or want her to get raped to death by Dickwolves.

As an attempt at trolling this episode failed horribly. As an attempt to discuss the subject in a constructive way, this is the best attempt I have seen so far.

You know, i came here expecting range and anger, what i got was the msot levelheaded discussion on the topic escapist has ever put out and to add to that, the comment section while wast does not seem to be raging in flames. I have severely underestimated you guys, you win this one.

JellySlimerMan:

Dont look at me, i am not part of an organizations that thinks that gathering money to help FICTIONAL women in distress is a top priority over the real ones. Just saying.

Feminism isn't an organisation, it's an ideal, a belief. Some people might use that belief negatively but painting all feminists with the same brush is like blaming Martin Luther King for the acts of the Black Panthers. It's dishonest at best and downright moronic at worst.

Charles Phipps:

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

Except you don't. There are entire genres where the protagonists are mostly women, or where you can choose which gender you wish to play.
They're simply predominant within the AAA gaming space on consoles, and consoles really do get loads of attention.
MMO's, most RPG's and Object-finding games provide plenty of options for people who wish to play women, and numerous multiplayer-only games have female models/characters or other similar signifiers (Tribes Ascend's voice packs, for instance)
Fighting games are also a good example, though with those and MMO's you have to pick through a bit more if you're annoyed by the chainmail-bikini-style stuff (I myself generally am unless we're going ridiculous Conanesque fantasy or Saints-Row-tier over-the-top) whether that be with franchises or characters
Though if you're going to criticize that, Mass Effect's fixation on Miranda's bum and skintight armour featuring boob-socks isn't really particularly good either

As for Anita's work and its academic worth, in what way is it acceptable for analysis of a medium to be limited in sources to TVTropes and the work being criticized? Reading entries off of TVTropes and then performing mental gymnastics to tie that in somehow to often entirely different issues (like domestic violence) without any citation of any work linking the two not only seems incredibly lazy, but below academic standards.
She also suggests that the works she's citing are only relevant when they include what she's looking for, and denies the relevance of context. Would you accept a work that only counts the number of racial slurs in Huckelberry Finn, and then comes to the conclusion that Mark Twain is a racist based on that alone?
As an academic would you find it acceptable if someone read the cliffnotes on a particular work, then did ctrl+f search on a keyword, made a list out of it and called it an educational and academic work examining the pernicious aspects of the piece of literature itself?
That's effectively the quality of Anita's arguments. When it's not context-less box checking and baseless assertions, it's outright misleading information. Some of her previous work has also suggested that any "Modest Proposal" style works in the industry would also set off the same alarm bells. It just seems remarkable to me that someone with an education in, and a job involving, the examination and criticism in media, would be so blind to the tone, inspirations and narrative context of a work.

btw, I feel your pain concerning Remember Me, though I didn't return it.
It sits in my library reminding me not to get too hyped up about new franchises, though Obsidian makes that REALLY difficult with their Project Eternity stuff

generals3:

Magenera:
This isn't the first time I brought it up. I have several threads where I used this info, so I just copy paste from other threads that I used. I lost the thread where some guy did the math and if you where to combine both the 360 and PS3 population of ownership in America, females would make up 20%, which average out to 10% of women in both platforms are owned by women. If this debate comes up again, I would more than likely just used this thread to get the info only if isn't locked. Then I would have to search for a later version.

I just want to correct a big math error there. If 20% of the Xbox's + PS3's are owned by women than on average 20% of the Xbox's and 20% of the PS3's are owned by women, not 10%.

Oops you're right.

My favorite part about this episode was the fact that they were 100% honest right from the start: "We just want some views...I know! Let's make a video about Anita Sarkeesian!" And what do you know? It worked! :P

I mean just look at the number of comments for the past 10 episodes: 60, 44, 71, 34, 70, 53, 37, 39, 82, 45. But make a topic about Anita and boom! We're up past 250! In order to find another episode that breaks 100, you've gotta go back to August where they ask "Who's the strongest female video game lead ever?"...which has a thumbnail of Anita Sarkeesian. :3

I'm not trying to poke fun at them, I really enjoy this show. Just saying that it's pretty funny that if you want to get views/comments, just make something about Anita and all of a sudden the web becomes the Field of Dreams: "If you post it...they will comment..."

As for the topic at hand: I've done a pretty good job at avoiding Ms. Sarkeesian. Can't say I've seen a single one of her videos - which in turn means I can't agree or disagree with anything she has to say - but just judging by what I've heard, she seems to be the Ann Coulter of video games in that she specifically makes her points (regardless of them being valid or not) as controversial as she can because she's fueled by all the negativity that they bring to her. She enjoys all the hate she gets because she converts it to ammo which is in turn used to support her points. Again, I haven't seen any of her work so even this is just an assumption on my part based on what I've heard (so take what I'm saying here with a tiny grain of salt), but I've heard she can be rather...picky with her videos' comment sections in that she ignores anyone that might have a valid argument that goes against her point and focuses purely on the mindless rage of random haters.

RJ 17:
My favorite part about this episode was the fact that they were 100% honest right from the start: "We just want some views...I know! Let's make a video about Anita Sarkeesian!" And what do you know? It worked! :P

I mean just look at the number of comments for the past 10 episodes: 60, 44, 71, 34, 70, 53, 37, 39, 82, 45. But make a topic about Anita and boom! We're up past 250! In order to find another episode that breaks 100, you've gotta go back to August where they ask "Who's the strongest female video game lead ever?"...which has a thumbnail of Anita Sarkeesian. :3

I'm not trying to poke fun at them, I really enjoy this show. Just saying that it's pretty funny that if you want to get views/comments, just make something about Anita and all of a sudden the web becomes the Field of Dreams: "If you post it...they will comment..."

As for the topic at hand: I've done a pretty good job at avoiding Ms. Sarkeesian. Can't say I've seen a single one of her videos - which in turn means I can't agree or disagree with anything she has to say - but just judging by what I've heard, she seems to be the Ann Coulter of video games in that she specifically makes her points (regardless of them being valid or not) as controversial as she can because she's fueled by all the negativity that they bring to her. She enjoys all the hate she gets because she converts it to ammo which is in turn used to support her points. Again, I haven't seen any of her work so even this is just an assumption on my part based on what I've heard (so take what I'm saying here with a tiny grain of salt), but I've heard she can be rather...picky with her videos' comment sections in that she ignores anyone that might have a valid argument that goes against her point and focuses purely on the mindless rage of random haters.

You should take what you've been told without watching it with an even larger grain of salt. If Anita Sarkeesian wasn't listening to criticism, the videos wouldn't be improving as each comes along, and yet the issues addressed in this video that are actually about the videos in the series are largely handled in the most recent episode, Ms. Male Character, despite some remaining examples of the issue. The criticism of lack of examples that were common knowledge and the criticism of that especially when it came to making her most important points were handled as were how she seemed to lack a point in early videos explaining why the trope is bad.

Therefore, she is making some effort to listen to the community in this regard.

I shall quote myself. no one will read the original post anyways as it has tl;dr written all over it.

Madmonk12345:

"The title - The most dangerous women in video games - that she has adopted - I don't think she invented it."
"Oh it makes me very upset and I'm not saying its her fault BUT she is not dangerous because her opinions are dangerous; they're not unraveling the fabric of our society. Her opinions are dangerous because they're immune to scrutiny. You cannot go against her without immediately being labeled sexist or personally damaging against her, and I expect our comments to say, "Oh. You don't like her. You must hate women. Do you batter your wife?' No I don't"

Her perspectives cannot be immune to scrutiny, and the claim that she doesn't listen to criticism must be false. You concede that in this very video when you admit that she has at least listened to criticism.

4:33 - "And I said OK those exist, you can't deny those exist because yeah, those are pretty clear examples which come from so many places, but you haven't told me why is this bad? In the next two episodes she describes why the trope is kinda bad, but at the same time I'm going to pick examples from games that are way in the past, - When was the last time Double dragon was relevant to anything in gaming - or you're going to pick games that nobody played, or you pick examples like DNF where everyone AGREES with you on."

This was a response to a valid criticism, that she hadn't elaborated on why the damsel in distress was bad. Even if you don't like the response, and even if your criticisms of her response are valid, this was a common complaint, and she responded to it. How does that line up with the belief that her views are beyond scrutiny, that she doesn't listen to criticism? In the third video, she even went on to explain why the past games are relevant, which is a criticism you just made now, describing how indie games aim for retro and end up taking various sexist ideals from "games way in the past" with them.

Additionally, you fail to discuss her most recent work Ms, Male Character, which kept such issues under handle for the most part. Most are relatable and familiar, and those that aren't are used as examples for a specific goal, where awareness is sacrificed for bluntness and visibility or is otherwise not really avoidable.
A list of all examples specifically mentioned, sorted by discussed Topic and point of usage:

Ms. Pac Man was discussed as the first of the archetype, despite being retro. Additionally, the simple nature of sprites in the retro era not only makes the consequences of the decisions involved immediately visible and difficult to deny
The main standout issue section that still has an issue with this is the "Put a Bow on it" section, where we have Adventures of Lolo and Bubble Bobble, two retro games, and Where's My Water and Giant Boulder of Death being games that aren't particularly common knowledge. However, enough examples of the bow appear elsewhere so that it isn't a problem, and the examples are more immediately visible. The only issue this causes is that it is front loaded, so people viewing who left thinking this criticism wasn't addressed might leave early. Even if you haven't played the other games, most people have at least heard of them(Though Ice Climbers may be only notable through the SSB series).

In comparison, most of the games mentioned in part 2 of DiD were either too obscure or not new information to the viewers as you mentioned, unless your examples were cherry picking. Of about fifty examples, the only ones memorable explicitly mentioned by name being Borderlands 2, Resident Evil 4 + 5, God of War, and Max Payne 3. For the rest, long strings of aphorisms of these non-memorable games are pointed out, outnumbering well known games at least 2 to 1.

When it comes to argument, you mentioned prior that using relevant examples was a problem. Well, in Ms. Male Characters Every character used as an example for an argument that isn't itself referring to an obscure behavior is relevant. Angry Birds is universal beyond even gaming and is used as a case study in the results of Ms. Male character in gender neutral games, where it labels the original as male despite having no gender at all before several updates to the game. In addition, many of the changes are unfamiliar to most because the ongoing game is approaching over-saturation, with many many spin offs that few follow, even though the concept itself is ubiquitous. Likewise, the example of Bowser's children is both well known because of many recent appearances in NSMBU and NSMB2 along with their presence in Super Mario World and SMB 3. In contrast, Part 2 includes an in depth discussion of Prey, a game released nine years ago which was a footnote in history. This is a handling of your criticism of the second parts that wouldn't exist if she wasn't actively paying attention to feedback, which cannot be anywhere on the scale that it is claimed.

Transcripts:
http://www.feministfrequency.com/2013/05/damsel-in-distress-part-2-tropes-vs-women/
http://www.feministfrequency.com/2013/11/ms-male-character-tropes-vs-women/

yunabomb:

bdcjacko:

I guess I don't understand what all the hubbub is about. Some lady wanted to put on a talk show about women's issues in games and did. Why does that cause such an epidemic of hate and internet flaming? But what can I say that has not already been said by movie bob and no right answer?

Jimquisition has the answer to that. All her past videos mainly stayed in the realm of online feminist circles. It was the gaming community itself that blew her up and gave her more prominence.

There was a post on these forums that also gave an explanation. I'm inclined to agree with it:

1. She's a woman.
2. She's a feminist.
3. She's directly targeting videogames.

Each of these independently can cause internet rage. Combining them caused a massive shitstorm.

I am pretty sure the video above directly addresses both of your statements. It wasn't what she is, or what she said, it was about the fact that no one was allowed to disagree without her or her army attacking them. I am of course referring to actual grievances against her, not the guys who were just being sexist. However it's hard to tell who's who because she and her follows have publicly grouped all opposition as one in the same, as Jim and Bob have done as well (sadly enough).

I commend No Right Answer for making this video, because someone sure as hell had to.

Magenera:
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

This assumes that these preferences are genetic in nature, which not only you have not proven, but you cannot prove. Stripping culture from genetics is nigh impossible, and assuming that something is genetic or biological prevents it from ever changing, or worse, is used as to justify racism, sexism or other prejudices. For example, IQ was once used as a valid metric and found that black people scored worse than white people on tests. This was used to justify racism at the time, assuming that this was because black people were inferior due to their savannah ancestry, but was later found to be a cultural problem in nature, with the test itself leading people of color to perform poorly because of various environmental factors.

If this is cultural then it is capable of change. We have this large group of people who aren't even really even advertised to for these games, for whom even when AAA games are actually made for them little to no marketing is made to attract these people. This is a huge market of people that would make lots of money, but no one's even tried. For example, both of your examples "refuting" the idea that women care about games as we know them, Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect, show only the male options in the advertising. Despite your claims, they don't really even try. In fact, if you'd watched TvW's Ms. Male Character you would have learned about this, where Anita referred to this explicitly. How can anyone expect women to pay attention when no marketing is actually put towards them?

xPixelatedx:

yunabomb:

bdcjacko:

I guess I don't understand what all the hubbub is about. Some lady wanted to put on a talk show about women's issues in games and did. Why does that cause such an epidemic of hate and internet flaming? But what can I say that has not already been said by movie bob and no right answer?

Jimquisition has the answer to that. All her past videos mainly stayed in the realm of online feminist circles. It was the gaming community itself that blew her up and gave her more prominence.

There was a post on these forums that also gave an explanation. I'm inclined to agree with it:

1. She's a woman.
2. She's a feminist.
3. She's directly targeting videogames.

Each of these independently can cause internet rage. Combining them caused a massive shitstorm.

I am pretty sure the video above directly addresses both of your statements. It wasn't what she is, or what she said, it was about the fact that no one was allowed to disagree without her or her army attacking them. I am of course referring to actual grievances against her, not the guys who were just being sexist. However it's hard to tell who's who because she and her follows have publicly grouped all opposition as one in the same, as Jim and Bob have done as well (sadly enough).

I commend No Right Answer for making this video, because someone sure as hell had to.

This isn't something that "Anita's army" did to you. This is an inherent problem in participating in a debate filled to boiling point with assholes while being careless. Even in the early days of society everyone thought that "people should be treated equally". they just had disgusting definitions of the word "people". These sort of redefinitions allow assholes to feel supported when statements of universal equality are stated hence the desire for "equalism" or some other term of the like that allows everyone to agree and feel like they contributed without actually changing their beliefs. As a result of these sort of subjective definitions, your condemnation doesn't actually show lack of support for any group that was actually responsible for the harassment nonsense. Few sexist people think they "were just being sexist", so the people you think you are condemning actually think you support them if they read your post. You need to name a specific group of people, a specific target, a specific subset of beliefs, if you want to actually show a lack of support for those people.

I'll lead by example.

You know those people who believe in evopsych, who will cite women's lack of presence in FPSes and the like as if it were attributable to their gender? Those people who say "WHAT ABOUT TEH MENZ" in every damn feminist debate? The people who always take moderate positions out of cynicism but still hold beliefs almost indistinguishable from MRAs about feminists despite disassociating themselves from the label? Those people are actively harmful to the community.

See? This isn't hard.

If your comments don't adequately make assholes aware that you think they are assholes, then the grouping and likewise is entirely your own. Yet you blame "her and her army". You're willing to name names when it's a feminist, some specific subset of people then, why not when describing the people you supposedly aren't? Is it because there IS no real difference, unless you hide behind subjectivity? Is it out of some desire to not make waves? What is it?

Madmonk12345:

Her perspectives cannot be immune to scrutiny, and the claim that she doesn't listen to criticism must be false. You concede that in this very video when you admit that she has at least listened to criticism.

I think you know very well what they meant by that statement. The fact of the matter is that anyone who wants to politely disagree with Anita puts themselves in the line of fire. I have even, numerous times, seen it suggested that people shouldn't disagree with her because of the fallout she received, or at least that nobody should engage with those making said complaints. Your statement in your other post about not seeing that? It's limited to one thread on one website.
Additionally, her responses to criticism often involve even worse logic than the original thing being criticized
According to Anita, if you act on something or someone, they/it become(s) an object, and this is objectification, and objectification is bad
So if I get injured, and someone helps me, I've been objectified
If I perform surgery on someone, they've been objectified
If I play a video game, am I not acting upon everything and everyone within it?

And YET it only seems to count in her cases of "woman gets captured/killed" and not in any examples involving the supposed objectification of all the millions of tortured, captured or killed male characters in video games. It also doesn't extend to its logical conclusion, where the only solution is to make a game where nobody acts upon anyone else except maybe in cases of simultaneous acting-upon

Madmonk12345:

This was a response to a valid criticism, that she hadn't elaborated on why the damsel in distress was bad. Even if you don't like the response, and even if your criticisms of her response are valid, this was a common complaint, and she responded to it. How does that line up with the belief that her views are beyond scrutiny, that she doesn't listen to criticism? In the third video, she even went on to explain why the past games are relevant, which is a criticism you just made now, describing how indie games aim for retro and end up taking various sexist ideals from "games way in the past" with them.

Her response never actually addressed the issue. It was a series of non-sequiturs joined together by similarity in terms across different fields, and was never brought up afterwards despite the criticism of that statement.
Then in the next video, she shows her game idea, it's exactly what she's been complaining about in almost every way (subversions of tropes don't count, captured woman = disempowered forever, and now thanks to Ms Male the colours for the character design are problematic by Anita's own metric)

Madmonk12345:

Additionally, you fail to discuss her most recent work Ms, Male Character, which kept such issues under handle for the most part. Most are relatable and familiar, and those that aren't are used as examples for a specific goal, where awareness is sacrificed for bluntness and visibility or is otherwise not really avoidable.
A list of all examples specifically mentioned, sorted by discussed Topic and point of usage:

What issues did Ms Male keep under control? Her examples were still largely retro games or derived (sequels or inspired by) retro games. Her arguments were still as broad and vague as ever, so as to be readily adjusted on the fly to apply or not apply to whatever Anita happens to like/dislike, and criticisms from prevous videos are still largely unaddressed

Madmonk12345:

In comparison, most of the games mentioned in part 2 of DiD were either too obscure or not new information to the viewers as you mentioned, unless your examples were cherry picking. Of about fifty examples, the only ones memorable explicitly mentioned by name being Borderlands 2, Resident Evil 4 + 5, God of War, and Max Payne 3. For the rest, long strings of aphorisms of these non-memorable games are pointed out, outnumbering well known games at least 2 to 1.

It's also worth noting that in many of the examples Anita uses, the reason for the scene in question is generally explained by the story or the source material (if any) for the game, and is in many cases accompanied by male characters meeting similar fates. This, however, is not brought up

Madmonk12345:

When it comes to argument, you mentioned prior that using relevant examples was a problem. Well, in Ms. Male Characters Every character used as an example for an argument that isn't itself referring to an obscure behavior is relevant. Angry Birds is universal beyond even gaming and is used as a case study in the results of Ms. Male character in gender neutral games, where it labels the original as male despite having no gender at all before several updates to the game. In addition, many of the changes are unfamiliar to most because the ongoing game is approaching over-saturation, with many many spin offs that few follow, even though the concept itself is ubiquitous. Likewise, the example of Bowser's children is both well known because of many recent appearances in NSMBU and NSMB2 along with their presence in Super Mario World and SMB 3. In contrast, Part 2 includes an in depth discussion of Prey, a game released nine years ago which was a footnote in history. This is a handling of your criticism of the second parts that wouldn't exist if she wasn't actively paying attention to feedback, which cannot be anywhere on the scale that it is claimed.

1. Prey wasnt released 9 years ago and the same blurb she gives to every other game isn't "in depth"
2. Generally a gender signifier is added to female characters as they're added later. Ms Pac Man was created after Pac Man, and by a team that didnt have the rights to the original. Additionally, characters with colour signifiers go both ways, or are we forgetting that the male character is often blue, wearing a baseball cap, etc.
Speaking of which, in the Diddy Kong/Dixie Kong case, Anita fails to mention the blatant necktie and baseball cap that both male characters wear, which she earlier ADMITS are gendered signifiers

As for the rest of your original post
White Knight is meant to refer to people who defend women on the basis of their gender. It was co-opted by people who wanted to get under the skin of guys who legitimately felt that a woman on the internet was in the right in a particular scenario

Professional Victim is meant to refer to people who essentially go out of their way to inflate any negative attention they get and/or use twisted logic to refer to harmless events as somehow hurtful or offensive. Often legitimate criticism is blatantly lumped in with the usual internet vitriol. Said inflation and twisting of logic is generally used to get attention without providing anything of substance, much like trolling

Your logic in their use of those terms providing cover for the people who use them to troll could also be used to apply to any word that anyone has run through the mud. For instance, One could easily judge the word feminism by the worst examples of its usage, with the cringeworthy opinions of shut-in misandrists being used to attack the term many people adopt innocently

Donating to spite trolls and donating to protect Anita ultimately result in the same thing; the funding of a project not for the sake of the project itself, but rather due to the controversy and flaming. This was pretty much all of Anita's funding past a certain point

Your own personal opinion of how sexist or not-sexist the video is doesn't really extend to the rest of the internet. Again, there are still people who don't even think it's right to criticize her, and larger groups of people who quickly turn to words like "sexist" and "misogynist" when Anita is criticized.

While Thunderf00t's video definitely lacked tact, and should have been made with a higher standard of research backing it, the actual message wasn't about rape apologetics or "truly avoiding rape", but rather about risk minimization. The issue right now is that it's very difficult for people to teach anything about preventative measures- regardless of the studies criticizing or backing it- without a huge backlash. The second someone suggests that certain actions increase one's chances of being attacked, they're immediately labeled as rape apologetics, actual rapists, or just the usual small-time label of "victim blamer". Unfortunately, tf00t decided not to actually educate himself on the actual statistics and trends of the crime and as a result he made a bunch of really ignorant statements
In this case, however, you can't even fall back on the usual counter argument, which would be "teach relevant portions of 4chan not to troll" in this instance
Or well... I suppose you could, but it wouldn't do you any good. I'd love to see you try though
You have to realize that this is a general problem. You cited Thunderf00t, yet did you know that he actually had to take legal action against someone for threats and promises of harm made to him by another youtube user? Are you aware that he, and many other youtube users get hate mail, death threats, and similar reactions on a regular basis?
Are you aware that many writers and journalists also had to deal with these things, in addition to stalkers and in some cases actual attempts on their life?

The fact of the matter is that if you're going to put yourself out in the public eye, on a large scale, or if you're going to make yourself well known to trolls, this is the inevitable result
It's not a "chance of" it's not a "possibly avoidable"
Someone is going to dislike you, and they're going to let you know in the worst way possible
That doesn't make the action itself justified, but it IS ignorant to suggest that the target of harassment had no agency when it came to that harassment. It's a factor that should be carefully considered.

Madmonk12345:
-

How did you get genetics, to actual women buying and telling people what type of games they like? Ask what type of games like to play, check who's the install base, do basic data gathering to find out what men and women are playing. Just because the shit doesn't resemble your perfect world does not mean that sexism is afoot.

You're so hellbent on trying to prove that the game industry doesn't cater to women, that you would actually ignore any evidence that proves the game industry cater to women. I find this funny as hell, Women choice only matters if they fall on my side otherwise it isn't a choice they made and thus nullified. Game industry cater to women, most of them don't share the same interest in games with the men and vice versa. People are allowed to like different shit.

Charles Phipps:
Re: Remember Me

No, seriously, games with great writing and gameplay will sell whether there's a female protagonist or not. Compare "Tomb Raider" and "Remember Me", it's not just the difference between Lara Croft and the female protagonist but also the fact Remember Me's cyberpunk aesthetic was nice but ultimately one-dimensional while the combat was a warmed-over Arkham Asylum at best (and Captain America: Super Soldier--shameless movie tie-in was STILL more fun).

No, female protagonists won't magically sell more games. You have to make them as good as the good male ones as there's plenty of male protagonist games which are crap too.

It's terrible Remember Me had to go to elaborate lengths to get published because it had a female protagonist. It's also terrible they didn't make a game worth playing.

I just use remember Me as a very recetn example of how the internet hooplah didn't translate into the sale one would think. As I said, on its own it's understandable, but it isn't on its own. Let's look at something elsae: the PSP version of Persona 3. It's one of the more highly praised RPGs of all time, and when they put out the portable version, they added the choice of gender for the main character, and added scenarios specific to playing the female character. Sales since 2009 = 160,000 units. Enter new excuses about how "I didn't want to buy a PSP" or "I don't like JRPGs" or "I only know about what gets big advertising so I didn't know about it." Publishers might be naive on this front, but they aren't stupid. They assume people true tastes and values are with what they spend their money on as that shows they are willing to give something up for what they want. If you claim to want something and don't buy it, it's easy to assume you didn't really want it, or it really wasn't that important to you.

I don't say this in defense of the status quo, but as someone with full anger that we won't see more Parasite Eve, Eternal Darkness, Dino Crisis, Xenosaga, or even Fear effect, and other franchises that died out under the mindset of female leads don't sell. Same for the lack of any variety from a lack of female protagonists in GTA, to Kairi not getting her own spinoff in Kingdom Hearts. I can't fault a business for not wanting to take actions that might cost them money. I fault those that didn't buy the games. The louder people scream about the lack of these things, the more I want to smack them and ask where they've been for the last 15 years to buy games that might encourage that to happen. Remember Me isn't the first, and probably won't be the last game to stand under publishers' noses as a sign of female leads not selling, and that's what needs to change. Not empty promises through internet videos and forum posts, but actual action needs to be takenbecause, honestly, I think we'd have to be idiots to think publishers were unaware of the gender debates going on, but they need something to show that this isn't just the angry internet being the angry internet.

So encourage everyone you know to buy The Walking dead season 2 where you play as the 10 year old black girl, or some similar game, and send a real message.

Charles Phipps:

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?

I see more revealing on a night out in a club sometimes.
is it only ok if it's shown in reality or something ?

Charles Phipps:

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.

Except if you read the developers response to what was raised you'd find there was a reason. I mean this is Dragons crown the game with a loin cloth wearing super buff dwarf and a night with a chest 10 times the size of his head. The overlooked part was actually related to game mechanics where by all the prisoners were female. While that was addressed it wasn't a great reason but that was where the controversy should have been not some overly busty character in the game.

The question is not should companies have these things but should people be allowed to tell artists they must change their art ?

This goes both ways if big companies are pressuring them to add the large busts then it's an issue just the same as those complaining about it.

The bit that still confuses me is this:
Male with huge muscles ripped to hell = Not in any way wrong because is a male fantasy icon all males should strive to be
Women with huge breasts = sexist

So there are no women in the world who actually want to be skinny-ish with massive breasts ?
That's not a fantasy for some ?
Katie Price AKA Jordan
Jodie Marsh

The Moment we tell artists what they can and can't create are we any better than those studios refusing to fund developers because they want to have a female lead in their game ?

Charles Phipps:

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

Depends how much the media keeps pointing out how great it is someone modded game X or Y so Female gamers can finally play as a female character.

Charles Phipps:

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.

Beyond Good and Evil is a good game I'll give you that however its pretty easy to look at that and go "Oh so that collection of tropes is a good female character now ?"

I'm not joking Jade is almost a trope character.
Female photographer - Yes that hasn't started to become a joke
Journalist - So further associating women with writing and the written word rather than careers which see less women entering them.
Non violent mostly - so are we saying women care more for life than men, as that sounds like a trope to me too.

The problem is if you start talking tropes and saying tropes are bad for cutting people off or enforcing social conventions then you can often find new tropes forming too and notice that undermine the points trying to be made.

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?

Except Ms Sarkeesian hasn't addressed a single critic. What she has done fairly regularly has been to address and show off the threats she's had and talk about all the terrible things people have said. She perfectly happy to have a dialogue if it make her look like a victim seemingly
now before someone claims that's a lie allow me to provide evidence
Article A

There are other articles but its a pain to link then as for some reason twitter isn't letting me link directly to other tweets

Redd the Sock:

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.

That would be because Remember me, kind of isn't that great game wise. I know you said about review scores but word of mouth spread quickly with remember me and while I did play and advanced build at a show months before release I was impressed with what I saw but it did had problems that I noticed in the about 30 minutes I spent with it. Problems which it turns out get worse throughout the game.

Charles Phipps:

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.

wait are you actually comparing game tropes being used to the Taliban oppressing women, forcing them to cover up and not show flesh and not being allowed to be educated.

Wait showing flesh...................... that sounds familiar as a criticism levelled against some female game characters does it not.

I believe the point being made was about the civilised world and non countries in which most residents couldn't afford video games or have far larger issues than video games. The point being made was and this is a heavy hitter of a point. Anita Sarkeesian in one episode spent a good 15 minutes on about domestic violence. Not once did she mention men can suffer it too. Not once did she give any statistic about men being abused. If you are talking about equal rights, it should make sense to include both sexes not just one.

Just so I can get a point in about the Ms Male thing. In films would it make sense if to introduce the character they went with a narrator who say "This is Ashley, she is female" It would be mocked to hell as you're having to address the audience. In video games not all the characters speak, not all have audio and as such short of very specific writing you can't tell the gender of a character without an identifier. Such as cleavage (Which Anita has said is wrong to use before in her Lego videos) Make up, again implied you can't use it. feminine clothing - so stereotyping them, or a bow. Infact in the video Anita almost champions the idea of companies having to introduce the character and directly tell the audience.

I totally agree with you guys. I just watched one of her videos and almost everything she talked about was a really old game or and irrelvant one, she used mega-man as an example I don't know if that game still exists and do not no one person that has ever played it. The only relevant argument she was making was about Mass Effect having an add campaign that focused on the male version of Sheperd. Then she used that as the reason that only 18%-20% of players played as the female version, because that is clearly the reason not the fact that the game is played by majority male players. That is where her only possibly good argument just went down the toilet. If she wants to make an solid argument she needs to find relevant information. And in the modern world where technology is advancing rapidly games from ten years ago do not really make the cut.

Also all of the information she came up with could have been easily been researched even while working a full time job. I do not think she needed any money unless it was for video equipment which as discussed in this episode clearly was not used.

Madmonk12345:

This assumes that these preferences are genetic in nature, which not only you have not proven, but you cannot prove. Stripping culture from genetics is nigh impossible, and assuming that something is genetic or biological prevents it from ever changing, or worse, is used as to justify racism, sexism or other prejudices. For example, IQ was once used as a valid metric and found that black people scored worse than white people on tests. This was used to justify racism at the time, assuming that this was because black people were inferior due to their savannah ancestry, but was later found to be a cultural problem in nature, with the test itself leading people of color to perform poorly because of various environmental factors.

It doesn't assume that at all. This is simply the state of the gaming market. If you want to argue it's nurture over nature, you're going to have to bring out some evidence, because nobody has argued the other way around.
Additionally, proving or disproving genetic predisposition would take far more than a few random folks from around the internet, but you're welcome to attempt to debunk an entire field of study on your own. I'm sure you'll show up those interdisciplinary researchers who disagree with you in no time.

Madmonk12345:

If this is cultural then it is capable of change. We have this large group of people who aren't even really even advertised to for these games, for whom even when AAA games are actually made for them little to no marketing is made to attract these people. This is a huge market of people that would make lots of money, but no one's even tried. For example, both of your examples "refuting" the idea that women care about games as we know them, Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect, show only the male options in the advertising. Despite your claims, they don't really even try. In fact, if you'd watched TvW's Ms. Male Character you would have learned about this, where Anita referred to this explicitly. How can anyone expect women to pay attention when no marketing is actually put towards them?

I like how you're saying all this as though marketing is based entirely on guesswork or consulting an ouija board or something. You're also incorrect. Mass Effect had a full contest and a number of promotional materials involving femshep. It's also worth noting that like... 20% of the population plays as femshep. Please check out info yourself instead of just regurgitating Anita's poor attempts at "academic" work
Not only that, but CoD really does push the whole girl gamer angle in their advertising, and started including female player models. The CoD ads would have been around in time for the ESA stuff, so what gives? Does the sudden inclusion of female models act as the only real driving force to play the game at all? If so, should the next set of numbers from the ESA not reflect such a change in what is most definitely the largest console franchise?

Additionally, female character options exist in fighting games, and a number of shooters. They also exist in LoL and Dota2
Despite that, there are few women in comp matches within the communities for those games, and I suspect they'll still be in the minority within the game's general population despite making up ~50% of the population in general

The games industry has to deal with what its got. Its job is not to try to train people to look outside of what they already enjoy, its job is to sell them entertaining products. Similarly, you're not going to see much crossover in marketing when it comes to toys, movies, clothes etc. outside of a specific brand marketed towards something other than its primary demographic.

Madmonk12345:

This isn't something that "Anita's army" did to you. This is an inherent problem in participating in a debate filled to boiling point with assholes while being careless. Even in the early days of society everyone thought that "people should be treated equally". they just had disgusting definitions of the word "people". These sort of redefinitions allow assholes to feel supported when statements of universal equality are stated hence the desire for "equalism" or some other term of the like that allows everyone to agree and feel like they contributed without actually changing their beliefs. As a result of these sort of subjective definitions, your condemnation doesn't actually show lack of support for any group that was actually responsible for the harassment nonsense. Few sexist people think they "were just being sexist", so the people you think you are condemning actually think you support them if they read your post. You need to name a specific group of people, a specific target, a specific subset of beliefs, if you want to actually show a lack of support for those people.

I'm sorry what? You're now comparing honest criticism (or maybe the trolling?) of a poorly researched web series to archaic notions of what constitutes personhood?
When do we start comparing Anita to MLK and people getting offended by video games to women in the Middle East? I love going straight for hyperbole. Can I compare TvW to the works of Shakespeare?

Madmonk12345:

You know those people who believe in evopsych, who will cite women's lack of presence in FPSes and the like as if it were attributable to their gender? Those people who say "WHAT ABOUT TEH MENZ" in every damn feminist debate? The people who always take moderate positions out of cynicism but still hold beliefs almost indistinguishable from MRAs about feminists despite disassociating themselves from the label? Those people are actively harmful to the community.

Sorry, are you trying to discredit an entire section of academic research, or just the people who utilize some of its (often flawed) findings for stupid internet arguments?
Are you trying to lead by example while also deciding to actually type out "what about teh menz" as an example of an entire portion of the discussion?
And which beliefs are you referring to? How many points do you have to agree with (insert feminist group here) on before you're allowed to not be harmful anymore? Or is it just the questioning of the label and the preference for the term "Humanist" "Egalitarian" or whatever it may be that irks you?

Madmonk12345:

If your comments don't adequately make assholes aware that you think they are assholes, then the grouping and likewise is entirely your own. Yet you blame "her and her army". You're willing to name names when it's a feminist, some specific subset of people then, why not when describing the people you supposedly aren't? Is it because there IS no real difference, unless you hide behind subjectivity? Is it out of some desire to not make waves? What is it?

This literally has nothing to do with that the guy you were responding to said. His complaint was that all opposition is being lumped in with anonymous trolls, which is exactly how large portions of this so-called "discussion" have been framed. Which names is he supposed to name? Random usernames that can change from site to site? The post number of a single 4chan user? Or is he just supposed to complain about people who criticize feminists?

It feels like you *really* want someone you can label as "one of them", which I find kinda sad considering how surprisingly upfront and civil most other people have been in this thread, whether or not I agree with them

Finaly someone with an internet presence beyong youtube speaks some reason.

The problem i personaly have with her and her videos are:

a) how her kickstarter suddenly took off after 4chan was provoked to attack her kickstarter video, wich strangely was the only video on her channel at the time that had comments allowed, wich after her own admittance she never does (or atleast heavily moderates comment sections) suddenly turning a nobody over night into the very damsel in distress she decries in her videos.. with the result that suddenly all internet famous "critics" and "journalists" came to her aid without even discussing once her very flawed arguments.. wich brings me to the next point:

b) That she brings up examples from almost 30-10 years ago, that have no bearing on the current state of gaming. I mean if you look at comercials from the 20s... REAL sexist commercials that blatantly tell you that women belong in the kitchen.. do you use these as examples why modern day commercials are somehow sexist?

c) She seems to have more of a problem with Japanese Culture and Nintendo in general. Allmost all her examples are either directly from nintendo or another japanese companies game. The only non asian games she came up with are Mass effect 3s marketing campaign focusing to much on male Shep (how dare they use an attractive char for both genders for their commercials!) and that Scribblenauts has a female char whos only character quality is being female.. as oposed to the male protagonist... who has as much personality as a blank piece of paper... so i guess he got that going for him.

d) The asian influence on the gaming market as a whole has been dwindling ever since the western Publisher giants came into existance and nowadays has no influence whatsoever anymore on western games. Infact nowadays its the oposite with games like Dragon age or Sleeping dogs clearly influenced by their western counterparts. Or when was the last time that a mechanic from a japanese game turned up in a western made game?

e) She pretty much created her own job in the games industry as "female character consultant" even thought her own example of a good female character goes against her own academic thesis and everything she has ever said or done with her own feminist frequency channel. Sarkesians arguments are a contradiction in themselves.

Wich leads me to the conclusion that while she found a serious topic that is worthy of discussion, she simply used it as a tool to get a foothold in the games industry... a industry that has to face ALOT of controversy regarding its acceptance compared to other established forms of media... and is now raking in the cash, getting invited to all sorts of places from TV news shows to speaking infront of academic audiences, never getting tired of talking about the highly orchestrated attack by internets mos isley against her kickstarter that in the end catapulted her to fame and alot of money with all sorts of "garme junalists" comming to her aid simply for the fact that 4chan was 4chan to her and not even bothering actually taking a step back and looking at her arguments, trampling everyone who disagrees with miss sarkesian as sexist troglodytes.

So yeah.. once again. Miss Sarkesian is not fighting the good fight for equal portrayal of women in video games (whatever that means), shes fighting the fight for her bank account being well stocked.

Also atleast for me that she is a woman has no bearing at all, i would have called out any male that did the same things she did just the same. Basicly i calls them as i sees them.

Honestly I think someone should make a series of videos that release after hers and just point out all the counter arguments and flaws in her videos. I would like to see that.

Also just to make a point whoever does make this series should do it for free because they easily could.

bceagleman:
Honestly I think someone should make a series of videos that release after hers and just point out all the counter arguments and flaws in her videos. I would like to see that.

Also just to make a point whoever does make this series should do it for free because they easily could.

They exist aplenty on youtube...

However it seems that those who make these videos cannot do these without namecalling and insulting.

Not all mind you.. but most. Wich really doesnt work in their nor anyones favour in the end.

Karadalis:

bceagleman:
Honestly I think someone should make a series of videos that release after hers and just point out all the counter arguments and flaws in her videos. I would like to see that.

Also just to make a point whoever does make this series should do it for free because they easily could.

They exist aplenty on youtube...

However it seems that those who make these videos cannot do these without namecalling and insulting.

Not all mind you.. but most. Wich really doesnt work in their nor anyones favour in the end.

Yah but I mean by someone more notable like these two or anyone willing to do it. Someone respected who will not be attacked with name calling and insulting.

bceagleman:

Karadalis:

bceagleman:
Honestly I think someone should make a series of videos that release after hers and just point out all the counter arguments and flaws in her videos. I would like to see that.

Also just to make a point whoever does make this series should do it for free because they easily could.

They exist aplenty on youtube...

However it seems that those who make these videos cannot do these without namecalling and insulting.

Not all mind you.. but most. Wich really doesnt work in their nor anyones favour in the end.

Yah but I mean by someone more notable like these two or anyone willing to do it. Someone respected who will not be attacked with name calling and insulting.

You are asking those that crowned her the "most dangerous women in gaming" and actively worked to make Sarkesian untouchable to now deconstruct her work for what it is...

Fat chance that is ever gonna happen.

Sites like the Escapist and Kotaku amongst others worked really really hard to make her the jesus figure of female gamers. So dont expect the likes of movie bob and jim sterling to actually take a critical look at her argument that the games she cites somehow reinforce sexist behavior (cause thats the gist of all her videos, that somehow even thought violent video games dont create violent people, sexist videogames on the other hand do create sexist people)

Its much easier to be angry and ranting about 4chan and the faceless mass that they are then to risk the posibility to be accused with sexism themselves like everyone else that has spoken against her.

Karadalis:

bceagleman:

Karadalis:

They exist aplenty on youtube...

However it seems that those who make these videos cannot do these without namecalling and insulting.

Not all mind you.. but most. Wich really doesnt work in their nor anyones favour in the end.

Yah but I mean by someone more notable like these two or anyone willing to do it. Someone respected who will not be attacked with name calling and insulting.

You are asking those that crowned her the "most dangerous women in gaming" and actively worked to make Sarkesian untouchable to now deconstruct her work for what it is...

Fat chance that is ever gonna happen.

Sites like the Escapist and Kotaku amongst others worked really really hard to make her the jesus figure of female gamers. So dont expect the likes of movie bob and jim sterling to actually take a critical look at her argument that the games she cites somehow reinforce sexist behavior (cause thats the gist of all her videos, that somehow even thought violent video games dont create violent people, sexist videogames on the other hand do create sexist people)

Its much easier to be angry and ranting about 4chan and the faceless mass that they are then to risk the posibility to be accused with sexism themselves like everyone else that has spoken against her.

I do not expect Movie Bob or Jim Sterling to do this not after watching their videos on the issue. But there are definitely respectable people who could do it in a serious manner and in a respectable way. It no way should it be those who gave her this crown to do it. Someone like these two respectful and level headed enough to point out the obvious flaws she is making. There is easily someone who is respected in the game community, that disagrees with her, can argue with her views respectfully, and handle and back lash from over sensitive sarkeesian supporters.

Also in my personal view the violent video games do not make violent people is the same argument as sexist video games do not make sexist people. What does make sexist people is a sexist gaming community that when it finds a girl playing Call of Duty they demand her to make them a sandwich this is not an issue of the game I can not find many sexist things in Call of Duty, excluding ghosts which I have not played, considering it leaves out women in most of them and included a female president in Black Ops 2. These players are probably already sexist because they are stupid and immature,which gaming did not make them that way, I do not think their early game experiences of saving princess peach made them think all women must make them sandwiches.

Elberik:

SoulChaserJ:
You guys need to re-do this episode with a woman against and one for the argument. You two basically disagreeing does nothing to stop the blatant white knighting on Anita's behalf.

Because only women are allowed to have opinions about gender-issues.

no but you would want someone who the discussion is actually about. Would you have a debate on race relations with only a white male panel?

They say they want the discussion well don't just talk about wanting to have a discussion actually have it.

bceagleman:
Honestly I think someone should make a series of videos that release after hers and just point out all the counter arguments and flaws in her videos. I would like to see that.

Also just to make a point whoever does make this series should do it for free because they easily could.

they exist already. They are pretty much all really bad as they get hung up on one thing and try to create a straw man. They really try to go after how her study isn't scientific without of course realizing that its not supposed to its a humanities project.

I am extremely surprised to hear you guys degrading another person's work so much, especially without any evidence to speak of, and when you guys know how difficult editing can be. You give no substantive explanation as to why you believe her research is lacking, or why you believe her videos do not meet your criteria for funding. What about Yahtzee's videos, for example? His videos are arguably less well researched than Ms. Sarkeesian's, and come in at about 5 minutes a piece, while her videos are around 20 minutes. She would be editing for almost four times his typical time. (Yahtzee has only to play a single game and give his opinion, Sarkeesian ostensibly has to play many to search for and locate evidence supporting her theses.) Don't you think people might be willing to pay $6,000 (I'd bet a lot more) for a series of Zero Punctuation videos? Is it so unreasonable to think that people would do the same for Feminist Frequency?

tl;dr-
This video felt like a hastily assembled ploy for numbers. I'm disappointed in you guys.

 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