No Right Answer: Is Anita Sarkeesian Wrong?

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

bobdole1979:

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.

If we are talking of logic, and whether an idea is correct, gender and race shouldn't be required to make any of the points.

My only problem with Miss Saarkesian is the fact that she considers violence masculine and pacifism feminist.

Which...is really really weird from an objective standpoint on eliminating sexism.

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.

How about because this isn't a problem about how men see women in gaming...it's an issue about how women feel they're being treated in gaming and hearing two non Sarkeesian women argue the point would carry much more weight. Jesus why is that so hard to understand?

LOL. OMG this is still going. Who gives a crap?! Seriously.

So some games like Dead or Alive pander 100% full throttle towards men. Problem?

If you don't like, find it offensive, DON'T BUY IT. It's probably not targeted at you, it was not made for you.

I find gay porn kind of gross. I don't watch it. Problem solved. Don't see me kicking up a fuss about it.

God of Path:
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.

Actually while I haven't time coded the videos i have actually addressed specific points raised in the videos and the way they were addressed.

For example the domestic violence statistics given being only for Male on Female violence when men also suffer domestic violence. Which actually in the context of the episode changes so much considering Ms Sarkeesian was on about Women becoming monster and the men killing them being a justification for domestic violence when in reality in most of the cases the Women attacks the man first. If you were to take the domestic violence analogy then if it were a Women being attacked the opinion when she fought back would have been of her being brave and heroic standing up to that violence. However apparently the fact the character is male means they should stand there and take the violent attacks and not be allowed to fight back. Which in itself says "Women need protecting they are not equal to men".

I have given an example of lacking research or omission of information. The Krystal fox thing, the fact Krystal fox after Starfox adventures joins the star fox crew as a female mercenary fighter pilot. Yet this piece of information is never said its just shown that she is captured and then says its another Damsel in distress trope. Many of the episodes imply that if someone becomes a Damsel in distress they can never be anything else.

Yahtzee's videos are a highly subjective opinion upon a piece of media. Ms Sarkeesian's are meant to be a highly objective look at the media to find the faults and avoid any personal bias getting in the way (e.g. constantly complaining about big busted characters and denying any potential positive aspects based purely on the fact they have big boobs). Also an importantly this is not Yahtzee's only job he is also a join manager / owner of a bar. Ms Sarkeesian has enough money to do this full time for a year on a decent wage and still have over $100,000 to use on the series.

SoulChaserJ:

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.

How about because this isn't a problem about how men see women in gaming...it's an issue about how women feel they're being treated in gaming and hearing two non Sarkeesian women argue the point would carry much more weight. Jesus why is that so hard to understand?

The slight thing there is its how women see the apparently mainly masculine gaming world treating them. Surely a dialogue is better than a list of demands.

I do agree two Women on would hit harder but simply because it would show that Ms Sarkeesian is not the voice of all female gamers.

So in my academic life, I wrote extensively on gender in media, so it's something very close to my heart. Anita S. isn't wrong and she's starting a very important dialog in media. She might not be using the most effective points ever, but I think that it's obvious that this conversation is important.

I actually wrote about Princess Peach in grad school as a recipient of the Gaze, and the androgynous retainers (who are implied female, but nothing in their portrayal suggests femininity). Princess Peach/Toadstool is completely passive -- she knees patiently behind Bowser waiting for Mario. Mario rescues her, and she remains on her knees in front of him, while he stares at something past her. There's nothing to suggest that the Princess is anything there but to give Mario something to do--without Mario and his quest to rescue her, she's nothing.

This debate is not just that women are represented in games, but *how* they are represented in games. Women in games by and large (not to say there aren't exception, just that they are in the vast minority), are either overly sexualized (Laura Croft) or nearly gender neutral (Metroid) to have lost any connection to femininity as a whole. In games where a player can play as a female, the females are always big-boobed, skinny waist, suggestive butt. Adjusting cup size tends to go from "Larger than normal" to "I should really have a boob cart to haul these things around", when it's offered at all, which is rarely.

Serrenitei:
There's nothing to suggest that the Princess is anything there but to give Mario something to do--without Mario and his quest to rescue her, she's nothing.

Actually she rules over a whole country, she's pretty much the most important person in that world which makes sense why the disposable plumber is trying to rescue her.

Male choices mainly fall within the walking pile of muscles, and if they are realistically portrayed, they are the nerdy tech guy or something. But you know what? That's perfectly fine. Games aren't gonna go anywhere with ordinary people, it would take the best of the best to do the stuff in video games. The single person that can take down a global criminal network for example. Why would being attractive and being kickass at the same time be any different?

Her heart, assuming she has one, is in the right place.

Everything else is a disaster.

I'm impressed. You can't have a discussion about it on forums without either Sarkeesian fanboys or haters going apeshit and reducing the discussion to a shouting match, so it's good to see a video where people discuss it calmly and rationally.

Serrenitei:

This debate is not just that women are represented in games, but *how* they are represented in games. Women in games by and large (not to say there aren't exception, just that they are in the vast minority), are either overly sexualized (Laura Croft) or nearly gender neutral (Metroid) to have lost any connection to femininity as a whole. In games where a player can play as a female, the females are always big-boobed, skinny waist, suggestive butt. Adjusting cup size tends to go from "Larger than normal" to "I should really have a boob cart to haul these things around", when it's offered at all, which is rarely.

Sorry to bring this point up again but Lara Croft has big boobs and ?

Does having big boobs mean they can't be considered a good character ?

Does this mean any male character who bares their chest ever can't be considered a good male character ?

I put it to you that Lara Croft is Batman but without the neurosis.

Uhura:
Yeah, I'm not really interested in getting too involved in this discussion but I have to say that I found this video a bit disappointing. I mean, it's nice that you didn't attack her person and all but I think some of the points you made were lazy. The money point especially. She clearly states on her Kickstarter page that "Your support will go towards production costs, equipment, games and downloadable content.". Asking for 6k for that doesn't seem unreasonable, especially if you take into account that
a) she bought a huge stack of games with that money
b) you don't know if she needed to upgrade her equipment for the project.
Showing photos of her pre-Kickstarter recording equipment is a non-argument since you don't know if any of those machines were on it's deathbed when she started the project.

She didn't say those are the games she bought. She just took pictures with them and the systems, all of which could have been borrowed. Not to mention last time I checked around 50 games (saying all 50 cost around $50 and that's being generous) and three systems cost in the neighborhood of at most(seeing as all of this could be bought used) $3000.00

What did she use the other 3K for? Ripping off other people's let's plays?

The discussion in the video was quite on point, but I'd still rather see an end to the endless attention towards Sarkeesian. It's become too monolithic too quickly. This is a clear-cut case of what Lester Bangs said about arts-scene figures like Andy Warhol - a fame that balloons into greater and greater amounts of fame that, over time, has less and less to do with a person's actual output or individual creativity.

For me, the tipping point for my skepticism was her meteoric rise into the TED-Talks circuit, where she can stand side-by-side with sociopolitical 'giants' like J.J. Abrams and Elizabeth Gilbert and tell sheepish Americans how to live their lives. I've been a left-wing (i.e. a real leftist who's read Marx, Proudhon, Adorno, etc..., not a right-winger with a leftist paint job like most American Democrats and TED-talks fans) supporter of class, gender, sexual, and racial equality my entire life, but have never gone on board with the American lifestyle-liberal approaches to solving such problems, a perverse set of tactics that are little different from the methods of advertisement and the constant spinning-up of social anxieties that characterize evangelical churches, nanny-state bureaucrats, and the corporations that infantilize and degrade people into rampant consumerism, group-think, and an anti-intellectualism that leads to anti-individualism. Unless liberal issues can extract themselves from these inhuman methods of top-down social control, propaganda, etc... and be retooled to point towards a more total evolution of equal society (i.e. one in which individual and social concerns both receive their proper due), it's pretend politics/intellectualism and opportunistic pandering at best.

Firefilm:
Snip

I am blown away. This is by and far the best discussion on this topic I have seen to date and I completely agree. I'm not gonna lie I was one of those 1,000 some odd people who responded to Movie Bob. I disagreed with the title of the piece because; 1) She's not dangerous 2) This (sexism in gaming) is a thing and needs talked about 3) One cannot be considered detrimental to ANYTHING if the arguments are under researched and untouchable.

My name is Sarge034, and I approve of this video. (You should screen cap this and/or add this under the video because I don't endorse just any old video on the internet.)

Stay classy my friends.

SlightlyEvil:
Pretty much my thoughts on FF: good points poorly made. She raises important questions, in old, shallow, and uninteresting ways without offering much in the way of answers.

Putting aside any misgivings people may have with methodology, this is pretty much my takeaway too. Good ideas marred by a somewhat shallow understanding of the materials at hand and through the filter of a branch of feminism I'm not entirely sure I agree with (whereas I'd give Susie Bright a high five any day).

*Glances around*
Holy shit, a discussion forum about TVW and people are actually having a fairly calm discussion. Color me impressed, internet :)

Bmagada:
She didn't say those are the games she bought. She just took pictures with them and the systems, all of which could have been borrowed. Not to mention last time I checked around 50 games (saying all 50 cost around $50 and that's being generous) and three systems cost in the neighborhood of at most(seeing as all of this could be bought used) $3000.00

What did she use the other 3K for? Ripping off other people's let's plays?


As for your point about her possibly borrowing them, is there something that makes you believe that to be the case? And no, you wanting her to be an evil, lying scam artist is not reason enough to believe that she just borrowed what looks to be a little under 200 games just to trick everyone.

Since those likely cost her more than her original budget, I'd assume that she was originally going to buy much less, though how much depends on how much she was going to spend on production and equipment.

LifeCharacter:
And no, you wanting her to be an evil, lying scam artist...

I'm really interested in learning this technique of knowing other people's wishes and motivations with 100% clarity. It would help me a lot in life.

That said; I don't think where she got those games is even relevant, seeing as I don't recall her ever stating either way, so it's beside the point anyway.

The_Kodu:

SoulChaserJ:

Elberik:

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

How about because this isn't a problem about how men see women in gaming...it's an issue about how women feel they're being treated in gaming and hearing two non Sarkeesian women argue the point would carry much more weight. Jesus why is that so hard to understand?

The slight thing there is its how women see the apparently mainly masculine gaming world treating them. Surely a dialogue is better than a list of demands.

I do agree two Women on would hit harder but simply because it would show that Ms Sarkeesian is not the voice of all female gamers.

That's my point exactly...well that and that were this an issue of race....let's say black and white because it's easy. Would you accept a black only viewpoint on white or vice versa? Of course not. It would be so one sided and nobody would ever be able to say anything that wasn't deemed as racist. So let's take away the false sense of right and wrong and let the "oppressed" class speak for themselves. Hell to the topic there are a ton of women on youtube that have refuted Ms Sarkeesian's point on multiple occasions. Their viewpoints tend to be drowned out simply because of the spotlight Sarkeesian got/gets with less than valid points. Hopefully people stop paying attention to her...or just stop paying her in general and the issues come to the forefront rather than the person.

deadish:
LOL. OMG this is still going. Who gives a crap?! Seriously.

So some games like Dead or Alive pander 100% full throttle towards men. Problem?

If you don't like, find it offensive, DON'T BUY IT. It's probably not targeted at you, it was not made for you.

I find gay porn kind of gross. I don't watch it. Problem solved. Don't see me kicking up a fuss about it.

Now imagine if gay porn was the only porn available. Maybe occasionally you'd get a naked woman to walk by for a second, but 99% of porn would be dudes having sex with other dudes. Lesbian sex scenes basically don't exist. Would you want to live in that world?

Also, holy cow, think about it. It's primarily dudes interacting with other dudes, and women are rarely involved; gay porn has a lot in common with most video games. I bet you could take just about any AAA video game premise, replace the "killing" with "sexing," and you'd have a premise for gay porn (and it would always be gay).

Here's the right answer. NO. Her facts could ALL be reversed to say "oh no look how objectified men are." She's a con artist. That's not my opinion, it's a proven fact.

glider4:
Here's the right answer. NO. Her facts could ALL be reversed to say "oh no look how objectified men are." She's a con artist. That's not my opinion, it's a proven fact.

Yeah! Because reasons!

Matt Gleason:

glider4:
Here's the right answer. NO. Her facts could ALL be reversed to say "oh no look how objectified men are." She's a con artist. That's not my opinion, it's a proven fact.

Yeah! Because reasons!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4luNFjHN_no
I think I will just leave this here. Oh yes and don't forget her connections to pyramid schemes.

SoulChaserJ:

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.

How about because this isn't a problem about how men see women in gaming...it's an issue about how women feel they're being treated in gaming and hearing two non Sarkeesian women argue the point would carry much more weight. Jesus why is that so hard to understand?

Because it's a superficial distinction.

It's about the quality of ideas. Who cares if it's said by a man or a woman?

dunam:

SoulChaserJ:

Elberik:

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

How about because this isn't a problem about how men see women in gaming...it's an issue about how women feel they're being treated in gaming and hearing two non Sarkeesian women argue the point would carry much more weight. Jesus why is that so hard to understand?

Because it's a superficial distinction.

It's about the quality of ideas. Who cares if it's said by a man or a woman?

As stated in another post, it does matter a bit. Here's why. As a man you'll never understand a woman's plight, just as most whites (sorry for the generality) can't possibly understand what black people have been through in the US. Just like most people in the US couldn't even begin to understand what's gone on in Bosnia/Serbia or other seriously war torn countries. Would you want someone the exact opposite of you representing you?

glider4:

Matt Gleason:

glider4:
Here's the right answer. NO. Her facts could ALL be reversed to say "oh no look how objectified men are." She's a con artist. That's not my opinion, it's a proven fact.

Yeah! Because reasons!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4luNFjHN_no
I think I will just leave this here. Oh yes and don't forget her connections to pyramid schemes.

Synopsis of that video: "Someone has an opinion about something that I don't agree with, so my opinion is that that person doesn't have a right to their opinion because they're not an expert. Please ignore the fact that I'm not an expert. Also I am angry because people didn't give me money to go on a media tour."

SoulChaserJ:

dunam:

SoulChaserJ:

How about because this isn't a problem about how men see women in gaming...it's an issue about how women feel they're being treated in gaming and hearing two non Sarkeesian women argue the point would carry much more weight. Jesus why is that so hard to understand?

Because it's a superficial distinction.

It's about the quality of ideas. Who cares if it's said by a man or a woman?

As stated in another post, it does matter a bit. Here's why. As a man you'll never understand a woman's plight, just as most whites (sorry for the generality) can't possibly understand what black people have been through in the US. Just like most people in the US couldn't even begin to understand what's gone on in Bosnia/Serbia or other seriously war torn countries. Would you want someone the exact opposite of you representing you?

I don't think men and women are exact opposites. Nor do you, I hope.

I think it's possible to understand things that you have not experienced yourself. It won't be the same, but empathy, interest and research together go a long way.

I wouldn't mind being represented by someone who is superficially very different from me, but cares about similar values and has a compatible method of communication.

I believe that the notion that women can't understand a men's plight (and the reverse) and the similar points you make about skin color or people from conflict/war torn areas, I believe that that notion elevates the difference to something mystical and holy and I believe it to be disingenuous or at the very least, untrue.

I'm not saying that we should speak freely and carelessly about things we know nothing about or that we should presume to have a full understanding of ANYONE else's plight, but a man can be as wrong or short sighted about men's issues as a woman can be about woman's issues.

It makes sense that you place value on what someone has experienced when they speak about a subject like this, I understand that you're not saying "Women know better", but "I'd like to hear the experience of someone who has experienced what it's like being a woman while playing games" (IF I understand you correctly! Otherwise, please inform me).

But wouldn't it make more sense and have more value to engage in discussion over the points they brought up, rather than the sex they were?

dunam:

SoulChaserJ:

dunam:

Because it's a superficial distinction.

It's about the quality of ideas. Who cares if it's said by a man or a woman?

As stated in another post, it does matter a bit. Here's why. As a man you'll never understand a woman's plight, just as most whites (sorry for the generality) can't possibly understand what black people have been through in the US. Just like most people in the US couldn't even begin to understand what's gone on in Bosnia/Serbia or other seriously war torn countries. Would you want someone the exact opposite of you representing you?

I don't think men and women are exact opposites. Nor do you, I hope.

I think it's possible to understand things that you have not experienced yourself. It won't be the same, but empathy, interest and research together go a long way.

I wouldn't mind being represented by someone who is superficially very different from me, but cares about similar values and has a compatible method of communication.

I believe that the notion that women can't understand a men's plight (and the reverse) and the similar points you make about skin color or people from conflict/war torn areas, I believe that that notion elevates the difference to something mystical and holy and I believe it to be disingenuous or at the very least, untrue.

I'm not saying that we should speak freely and carelessly about things we know nothing about or that we should presume to have a full understanding of ANYONE else's plight, but a man can be as wrong or short sighted about men's issues as a woman can be about woman's issues.

It makes sense that you place value on what someone has experienced when they speak about a subject like this, I understand that you're not saying "Women know better", but "I'd like to hear the experience of someone who has experienced what it's like being a woman while playing games" (IF I understand you correctly! Otherwise, please inform me).

But wouldn't it make more sense and have more value to engage in discussion over the points they brought up, rather than the sex they were?

I didn't mean to make the point "other worldly". As is stands, the examples I used would be pretty true. That's not to say that it can't happen but as it stands (and generally speaking) someone sitting in a comfortable chair possibly with a drink next to them in a heated building typing on a computer can't possibly understand what it's like with bullets raining over top of them wondering where their next meal will come from and if they'll live to see tomorrow.

And yes you do understand me correctly when I said that I'd rather hear two (or more) women speak on this. I'd much rather hear them go over the points as they see it rather than pots calling kettles misogynists. And again the value at this point is making sure that Anita Sarkeesian is not the ONLY voice being heard and the only way to do that is to not be male. Like it or not no matter what we say, think, or do she has a bulletproof shield of intolerance hovering around her and like Diana on Paradise Island, only another woman can dethrone her.

SoulChaserJ:

I didn't mean to make the point "other worldly". As is stands, the examples I used would be pretty true. That's not to say that it can't happen but as it stands (and generally speaking) someone sitting in a comfortable chair possibly with a drink next to them in a heated building typing on a computer can't possibly understand what it's like with bullets raining over top of them wondering where their next meal will come from and if they'll live to see tomorrow.

And yes you do understand me correctly when I said that I'd rather hear two (or more) women speak on this. I'd much rather hear them go over the points as they see it rather than pots calling kettles misogynists. And again the value at this point is making sure that Anita Sarkeesian is not the ONLY voice being heard and the only way to do that is to not be male. Like it or not no matter what we say, think, or do she has a bulletproof shield of intolerance hovering around her and like Diana on Paradise Island, only another woman can dethrone her.

Since you didn't answer my last question, you give me the assumption that you disagree. That someone's sex is more important than the value of their ideas.

You also say that your point is that making sure Anita Sarkeesian isn't the only voice being heard. But in the last few sentences you show what your real point is. Making sure she isn't the only female voice being heard. I find that notion quite sexist and an example of how discussion is destroyed by those on the feminist side.

(an example of how it is destroyed by people on the opposite side is 4chan / harassment)

Xanarch:

glider4:

Matt Gleason:

Yeah! Because reasons!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4luNFjHN_no
I think I will just leave this here. Oh yes and don't forget her connections to pyramid schemes.

Synopsis of that video: "Someone has an opinion about something that I don't agree with, so my opinion is that that person doesn't have a right to their opinion because they're not an expert. Please ignore the fact that I'm not an expert. Also I am angry because people didn't give me money to go on a media tour."

I would say that the video's editorial elements are certainly lacking, but the point that she's completely dissonant and inconsistent about 'loving gaming for years' seems completely valid, given the video footage shown. Nothing in it remotely resembled jealousy whatsoever, unless asking people to 'subscribe to my channel if you like the video' is now tantamount to ill-willed sour grapes. As well, the dude didn't ask anyone for money or a media tour. Arguments that automatically shame criticism as petty opportunism are the worst sort of success-shilling B.S. You may as well skip the re-branding step and simply call for censorship.

I've honestly sort of steered away from this whole thing. Tried to follow her points for a little bit when the whole thing started, but they didn't seem that interesting or enlightening to me, nor that confrontational.

Whatever she says however, the reaction has been utterly ridiculous and embarassing on account of some people. If anything, it totally showed how many misogynists there are out there, something that I'm also reminded of in most of the topics about females in games around many forums.

So yes, in my opinion there still is a lot to be done for women in gaming, both in terms of female characters and for the mindset of certain people out there. Even though I don't find her points that good or relevant, as the video detailed.

As far as the money goes, I don't see why she needed that much for those purposes. But hey, if people wonna throw it at a project like that, it's their money.

bobleponge:

deadish:
LOL. OMG this is still going. Who gives a crap?! Seriously.

So some games like Dead or Alive pander 100% full throttle towards men. Problem?

If you don't like, find it offensive, DON'T BUY IT. It's probably not targeted at you, it was not made for you.

I find gay porn kind of gross. I don't watch it. Problem solved. Don't see me kicking up a fuss about it.

Now imagine if gay porn was the only porn available. Maybe occasionally you'd get a naked woman to walk by for a second, but 99% of porn would be dudes having sex with other dudes. Lesbian sex scenes basically don't exist. Would you want to live in that world?

Also, holy cow, think about it. It's primarily dudes interacting with other dudes, and women are rarely involved; gay porn has a lot in common with most video games. I bet you could take just about any AAA video game premise, replace the "killing" with "sexing," and you'd have a premise for gay porn (and it would always be gay).

If you can't find video games that are to your liking ... tough luck.

Developers make whatever the heck they want. You have no right to tell them what to make.

You are free to create your own women friendly video games if you think there is a market for it. NO ONE IS STOPPING YOU!

You are not being oppressed nor ill treated. Just not being catered to ... and they don't have to cater to you if they didn't want to - just like a high end restaurant can refuse to serve you a cheese burger.

LifeCharacter:

Bmagada:
She didn't say those are the games she bought. She just took pictures with them and the systems, all of which could have been borrowed. Not to mention last time I checked around 50 games (saying all 50 cost around $50 and that's being generous) and three systems cost in the neighborhood of at most(seeing as all of this could be bought used) $3000.00

What did she use the other 3K for? Ripping off other people's let's plays?


As for your point about her possibly borrowing them, is there something that makes you believe that to be the case? And no, you wanting her to be an evil, lying scam artist is not reason enough to believe that she just borrowed what looks to be a little under 200 games just to trick everyone.

Since those likely cost her more than her original budget, I'd assume that she was originally going to buy much less, though how much depends on how much she was going to spend on production and equipment.

And she hasnt used a single one of these PS3 or Xbox 360 games in her videos.

Infact most of what she used is either from nintendo or other japanese companies. The only game available on Xbox 360 or PS4 that she used for her show was Mass effect 3

And even that game she didnt show any ingame scenes that werent ripped straight from a trailer.

So... she has all this material of allegedly possible sexist games at her disposable... yet has not used a single one of them and instead uses examples from 30 years ago to make a point that games back then where more male focused then they are today...

Could it be that she simply didnt found enough examples for her theory in the current generation of games? *le gasp* Is such a thing possible? Is that why she had to fall back on games from the last 3 centuries to somehow justificate her point?

bobleponge:

deadish:
LOL. OMG this is still going. Who gives a crap?! Seriously.

So some games like Dead or Alive pander 100% full throttle towards men. Problem?

If you don't like, find it offensive, DON'T BUY IT. It's probably not targeted at you, it was not made for you.

I find gay porn kind of gross. I don't watch it. Problem solved. Don't see me kicking up a fuss about it.

Now imagine if gay porn was the only porn available. Maybe occasionally you'd get a naked woman to walk by for a second, but 99% of porn would be dudes having sex with other dudes. Lesbian sex scenes basically don't exist. Would you want to live in that world?

Also, holy cow, think about it. It's primarily dudes interacting with other dudes, and women are rarely involved; gay porn has a lot in common with most video games. I bet you could take just about any AAA video game premise, replace the "killing" with "sexing," and you'd have a premise for gay porn (and it would always be gay).

I guess NBA basketball has a lot in common with gay porn too, if you replace the "basketball" with "sexing".

I'd still want to live in your proposed world... I wouldn't watch it's pornography.

Magenera:

bdcjacko:
Hold on, she needed $6000 to change back ground colors for her web series? Money well spent.

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?

Someone spam her kickstarter on 4chan and 4chan got pissed. Gaming Journalism decided to blame the gamers for it. Making a bigger shitstorm, as one group got the blame as much as 4chan. Though the troll was ignored for starting shit.

GundamSentinel:
Nicely balanced discussion that addresses some of the points that have been bothering me with this whole Sarkeesian thing. She makes some good points, but the way she does it is often a bit ehhhh...

What bothers me in particular is the inability to have a discussion about it without being labeled one thing or another. One the one hand, if you agree with her, you're the industry killing party pooper (like the industry will immediately collapse if women are represented differently). On the other hand, if you don't agree with her, you're a misogynist bent on enslaving women (in a society where women generally have longer, safer, healthier, happier lives than men, I don't see how video games are breaking it all down, but whatever).

To me, the solution has always been simple. The problem isn't that women are often represented in stereotypical ways (it's male power fantasy in a piece of escapist media, what's the problem?). It's that they aren't represented in other ways as well. That the industry doesn't pay attention to what women want. Other industries (TV, music, toys, electronics, medical, you name it) have been doing that for years and it worked out really well for them and for women. Hell, even a traditional male product like LEGO saw the female line being the best sold in the past year. So go do it!

That's false though, the game industry does pay attention to female gamers, the problem can be summed up looking for JRPG's in a community filled with FPS's. Your escapistmagazine, IGN, Gametrailers, and such are part of the male market of gaming. In this case we are asking why the male market of gaming dominated by men doesn't cater to females as much as males.

Honestly it one of the things that pissed me off in this debate. The fact that people are calling it sexist that one market caters to one gender over the other because they are the majority of the consumers.

But we're not the majority anymore.

http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/691571/pew-survey-shows-50-gamers-are-women/

50% of women are gamers and with those numbers nobody is saying that we start catering to women and women only but to include women in the way we market and speak of games. Including an audience could not hurt this industry in any way, shape, or form.

Uhura:
Yeah, I'm not really interested in getting too involved in this discussion but I have to say that I found this video a bit disappointing. I mean, it's nice that you didn't attack her person and all but I think some of the points you made were lazy. The money point especially. She clearly states on her Kickstarter page that "Your support will go towards production costs, equipment, games and downloadable content.". Asking for 6k for that doesn't seem unreasonable, especially if you take into account that
a) she bought a huge stack of games with that money
b) you don't know if she needed to upgrade her equipment for the project.
Showing photos of her pre-Kickstarter recording equipment is a non-argument since you don't know if any of those machines were on it's deathbed when she started the project.

The second argument that seems lazy is the whole 'you can't say anything against her or you'll get labeled as sexist'. This seems like a massive overstatement to me since most of the pro-feminist posters on the Escapist (and on other pages) have expressed disagreements and/or indifference towards Sarkeesian's project and I've never seen anyone call them sexist for it. I'm sure it happens but not to the extent you seem to imply here.

But yeah... meh.

Hell yeah it happens to the extent that they say it does, just not specifically on the escapist. On Youtube however, is whole different story...

 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
Register for a free account here