Kickstarter Video Project Attracts Misogynist Horde

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 . . . 35 NEXT
 

hentropy:
instead of an older woman who might be just as capable, or even a small group of people. Why not a story about a mom trying to lead her kid(s) through the end times? It feels wrong to most people because guys can be the only ones who are strong and resilient enough to provide leadership in such a situation, where women always have to be under their wing.

I hate the implication that fiction needs quotas in their characters.

Having the protagonist be a women (and especially her mother) would change their relationship and how they interact with each other. It would be a different story.

animehermit:

SOCIALCONSTRUCT:
Generally speaking men are much better firefighters than women. Organic cultural perceptions are built around patterns that are generally true rather than exceptions. I prefer this organic viewpoint to PC tabula rasa nonsense.

Just because men CAN be better at firefighting, doesn't mean that we shouldn't allow women to also be firefighters. I'm sure every woman currently employed as a firefighter is better at it then I am.

Taking exceptions as the norm is not a useful method for establishing a model for understanding the world. An individual women that would be a good firefighter is an exception. An individual man that would be a worse firefighter than most women is an exception. Exceptions exist but they are also entirely beside the point.

My point is that if you start from a tabula rasa premise then you are compelled to reach a tabula rasa conclusion. If you start from the premise that all gender differences stop sharply at the reproductive systems then you are compelled to the conclusion that men and women are equally good at firefighting. To put it another way, if men and women are identical and interchangeable in every way then firefighters and cultural depictions of firefighters should be at least 50% female. If reality doesn't line up with the theory then a great injustice has been done and society needs to be organized to fight it. Again, all of this is quite automatic and it is impossible to reach any other conclusion from the premise. At this point in this process, Lego needs to be publicly shamed into make more female Lego fire fighters unless they wish to be branded as oppressive or hateful or something. Similarly, fire departments will need to implement gender quotas and lower performance standards to move in the direction of gender parity.

socialistmath:

Schadrach:

Do we? What other crimes do we pursue and sometimes convict on nothing other than victim testimony? What other crime can you say "That 51 year old man committed this crime against me 36 years ago when he was babysitting", and get a conviction with no other evidence (more importantly, how would you defend against that?)? Or for a better example, imagine the person you lost your virginity with (if such a person exists) decided tomorrow to claim that encounter was rape/sexual assault (depending on the genders involved, since forced intercourse isn't rape if it's female-on-male). How would you defend yourself? As far as I can tell, the only answers are video every sexual encounter, and don't stick it in the crazy (always good advice).

"B-b-but what about people accused of rape!?" Really? You bring up bullshit about false rape accusations? Do you have any idea of how statistically insignificant those accusations are? Do you not understand how much bullshit a woman goes through when she dares to accuse a man of rape? Why would any woman want to go through all that?

So, are you suggesting that women are incapable of deceit, or that we should pretend that they aren't because it only throws some men under the bus? Most of the studies on the topic end up with results in the 2-11% range[1], mostly depending on what instrument they use. Quite a few [2] come up with much larger numbers than that, but usually have a methodology that some disagree with (such as assuming that when an alleged victim recants that means the recanted accusation was false). Something occurring with a frequency that according to more conservative methodologies could be as frequent as 1 in 9 cases is *not* statistically insignificant.

As for why a woman might falsely accuse someone of rape, sexual assault, or domestic violence, that seems to vary pretty broadly from case to case. A cursory search seems to run everything from divorce and custody cases [3] to avoiding being caught cheating to using it to provide an excuse for her own violence [4] to sometimes even something as trivial as dodging a cab fare [5]. People are individuals, and as such, there's no singular reason they might decide to lie.

socialistmath:

Rape cases need to be thoroughly investigated, tried if there's evidence, held to the same goddamned standards as every other criminal case, if there's a finding of guilt, punished appropriately, and if there's evidence that it's a false accusation, then that needs to be thoroughly investigated, tried if there's evidence, held to the same goddamned standards as every other criminal case,

Regardless of whatever men's rights activists vomit out of their putrid mouths, rape already is held to those standards.

Name another crime, any other crime, where the allegation and testimony of the victim is proof enough to get a conviction with no corroborating evidence. Name another crime where you'd accept an accusation alone as proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused was guilty.

socialistmath:

[yes, I am saying falsely accusing someone of a sex crime should itself be a sex crime]).

You're mentally ill if you seriously think this. Seriously? You equate the false accusation of rape to rape itself?

No, I'm not equating it to rape. Maybe you should look at the full breadth of things that count as "sex crimes" and thus yield getting your scarlet "A." I'm saying it should count as a "sex crime", thus yielding mandatory registration on the sex offender registry and some meaningful punishment (as opposed to the current situation which in most jurisdictions is a fine [akin to a bad speeding ticket, but without the points on your license]).

socialistmath:

Likewise, I think the media should be barred from naming either defendant or victim in such a case (as opposed to the current practice of anonymizing the victim and plastering the defendant's name everywhere, thus effectively ruining his reputation even if innocent).

"Think of the poor rapists' reputation!"

Did I say a damned word about keeping anonymous those found guilty? You appear to want to be sure that anyone accused, even if falsely, "gets what they deserve" as you put it below? While ensuring that anyone who makes a false accusation is free to know that no one will ever know what kind of horrible person they are?

socialistmath:

If the defendant is found anything other than guilty, I think the defendant's name should not be released. If there's a false accusation case, I think a finding of guilt should involve releasing the false accuser's name, but letting the falsely accused remain anonymous.

Let me guess, you want their name made public so they can get what they deserve, right?

Didn't say that. I want their name made public because they are guilty of a terrible act, and they shouldn't be guaranteed protection from people knowing that.

Wanetta Gibson is actually a good recent example of this (you would agree that the victim stating outright "No, he did not rape me, but I don't want to clear his name because I might have to pay back the large sum of money I fraudulently sued the school for" counts as clear evidence of a case of false accusation, right?). No, I don't want her to "get what she deserves" (I don't even like that you are implying that), but I don't think she should never have to deal with the fallout of that choice. You would, as I understand it, want her to be kept anonymous forever, because she shouldn't have to be responsible for that terrible thing she did, right? I personally think in a just world, she'd see some jail time, be put on the registry, and have all future wages garnished to start paying back from her fraudulent suit (though I doubt given what she did she'd be terribly employable).

After all of that I feel I need to reiterate that I don't believe all rape accusations are false, or women need to be "put in their place" for daring to accuse a man of a crime he committed, or any other ridiculous exaggeration you might concoct. Actual rape happens, should be investigated, and the rapist brought to justice and appropriately punished. However women, by virtue of being human, are not perfect fonts of honesty and are fully capable of being just as malevolent as any man, and false accusations are a uniquely gendered avenue through which this can occur. Those engaging in such things need to be investigated, tried, and if guilty punished.

JerrytheBullfrog:

Jessica Valenti.
Clarisse Thorn.
Hugo Schwyze.
Alyssa Rosenberg.
Pretty much everyone at Feministing.
No seriously, what about teh menz, those guys.
Rebecca Watson.

That's just a number of prominent feminists I found just on my fucking twitter page who are all reasonable as hell.

Hmm, a quick Googling turns up something a bit unpleasant about Valenti (specifically an article in which it sounds an awful lot like she wants the burden of proof in rape cases to lie with the accused in an article about Julian Assange [quoted below]), and Hugo is generally ugh (I find it interesting that he's such a popular male feminist though, given that he's a professor who used to sleep with his female students, almost murdered an ex girlfriend, may have fathered a child that he helped the mother pretend was her other boyfriend's because she wanted to marry the stable one with the good job, acts an awful lot like a recovering addict using "feminism" as a movement as his sponsor, pretends that all men everywhere are exactly like him and all the dirtbag things he's done before, and tends to take the view that women have no agency at all since they seem never to be responsible for their own actions). NSWATM is usually pretty reasonable, though they occasionally have their off days (actually been reading it since it's launch though I despise the new format since they've moved to Good Men Project). Clarrise isn't too bad either. Haven't read any Rosenberg. Feministing is a bit hit and miss. At least you didn't use Pandagon, Shakesville, or RadicalHub as your examples.

Jessica Valenti:
Swedish rape laws ... go much further than U.S. laws do, and we should look to them as a potential model for our own legislation.

In fact, some activists and legal experts in Sweden want to change the law there so that the burden of proof is on the accused...[6]

JerrytheBullfrog:
Feminism = not a monolith. Or shall I get Anders Breivik to represent all gamers?

Feminism is not a monolith has two effects. One, it allows a No True Scotsman argument while pretending that's not what is being done. Imagine I claimed "Republicans (to pick a group I gathered you don't like given you've accused me of being right wing[personally, I'm registered independent in large part because I can't figure out why one's positions on freedom of speech, abortion, and gun control should in any way be remotely related -- as an aside I <3 ACLU, pro-choice, and pro-gun]) are not a monolith", therefore you can't take any statement from or about any of them as even being an example of things they say, even when that statement is fueld by their Republican-hood. Or Democrats, or Neonazis, or MRAs. In fact I'm pretty sure I can argue that since "Neonazis are not a monolith", that it's impossible to demonstrate that Neonazis are racist scum because some other unnamed and unknowable Neonazi "isn't like that."

On the converse, since FINAM means that almost no beliefs are actually feminist ones, thus it sets the bar really really low to count as a feminist. In fact, if the bar is "believes men and women should have equal rights and responsibilities wherever possible, and equivalent ones when equal ones are literally impossible", then *I* count as a feminist. In fact, almost everyone you meet is, even if a lot of them wouldn't use that label because of all the other things that seem to get attached to it.

Anders Breivik seems to be a one off case, I can't point to dozens of examples of people like him. I *can* point to dozens of examples of people identifying as feminist saying terrible, terrible things, often in books used in the academic study of feminism afterward, and not as examples of one-off nutjobs (influential feminists from the 70s tend to fill this hole readily, for example).

JerrytheBullfrog:
(Also, spoiler alert, but the divorce-custody thing? Is also an example of sexism against women - we give custody to women more often because society forces them into the nurturing caregiver role, so clearly the mom MUST be the better child rearer - that also happens to hurt men. HUH.)

Ah, yes, the old "anything that screws men specifically is really about women" argument. Got a version of it for why men commit suicide at a dramatically higher rate than women, but we still focus suicide prevention selectively at women?

wetnap:
or someone working the mines digging coal until you die.

Damnit, I'm playing Minecraft completely wrong, aren't I? =p

JerrytheBullfrog:
As a guy who used to be as fucking willfully blind as you, I have seen rape culture for a fact.

Care to provide some evidence? I'm actually interested, because it always seems like underpants gnome logic to me:

1. Someone tells a joke that references rape in any fashion/makes somthing that loosely implies rape.
2. ???
3. Rapists feel better about being rapists, so more actual rape happens.

I can't come up with an example that doesn't also require nearly the entire game industry and most of the movie and TV industries to be promoting a "murder culture" wherein murder is trivialized and normalized and actual murders should be skyrocketing for the past few decades. But that doesn't match reality at all.

greatorder:
gotta say, the insult 'ovendodger' is new to me...

Yeah, I'd never heard that one before either. Is it supposed to be like calling someone a draft dodger except their not in the kitchen so their dodging the oven? Or am I supposed to be building a trebuchet with which to fire ovens at feminist icons? Actually that last one could make for an interesting game concept, maybe bonus points for hitting Valerie Solanas before she can shoot you?

lizabeth19:
Oh dear Lord. Maybe this thread should be renamed "Feminist commentator has opinion, internet has conniptions".

Seriously, I bet if I started a thread entitled "Maybe the feminists are right...", I would get a couple of hundred views in a matter of minutes.

You can't do that. Feminsits cannot be right about anythnig, because they hold no positions despite having strong opinions about everything.

Brian MacInnes:
Oops! Who ever was in charge of assembling this openly gynemasculinistic project's head montage haplessly included a Princess Peach illustration from no less than 'Super Princess Peach'. That would be the one in which she heroically advents to rescue the helpless Mario and Luigi from Bowser, decimating his army on the way. Also fearless tomb raider Lara Croft, among others.

It's also the game where she decimates Bowser's army by using her mighty mood swings. So, yeah, sorry, she'll rip Super Princess Peach a new one.

animehermit:

SOCIALCONSTRUCT:
Generally speaking men are much better firefighters than women. Organic cultural perceptions are built around patterns that are generally true rather than exceptions. I prefer this organic viewpoint to PC tabula rasa nonsense.

Just because men CAN be better at firefighting, doesn't mean that we shouldn't allow women to also be firefighters. I'm sure every woman currently employed as a firefighter is better at it then I am.

So long as they are held to the same standards as the men, they certainly should be. When you start holding them to a separate lesser standard because not enough are passing, then there's a problem.

I actually find the case with the boy on the girl's field hockey team interesting. You know, the one where there's no boys team so he's on the girls team and people have tried to kick him off for being good at the game? I've seen a *lot* of people feel it's unfair for him to use a Title IX argument because he's "not a protected class."

Father Time:

Society and the media seem to jump on their side a lot. See duke lacrosse where everyone immediately assumed the college kids were guilty until it became painfully clear they weren't. I can't think of a big shitstorm where everyone sided with the accused.

Also saying you support something is saying you are actively rooting for it which he is not.

You know why I didn't footnote Duke Lacrosse or Hofstra as examples above? Because I wanted more recent ones to avoid the whole "see you have to go back a very long time just to find one example, it's not really important" argument I've seen before.

[1] New York Rape Squad (1974), Hursch and Selkin (1974), Kelly et al. (2005), Geis (1978), Smith (1989), U.S. Department of Justice (1997), Clark and Lewis (1977), Harris and Grace (1999), Lea et al. (2003), HMCPSI/HMIC (2002)
[2] McCahill et al. (1979), Philadelphia police study (1968), Chambers and Millar (1983), Grace et al. (1992), Jordan (2004), Kanin (1994), Gregory and Lees (1996), Maclean (1979), Stewart (1981)

Calibanbutcher:

tehweave:
Five things.

1. It's youtube commenters. They're 13-17 year old boys who have never touched a boob before. It's the same commenters who drastically hated the male shepherd sex scene from Mass Effect 3.

2. It looks like she got her project funded, so... Good.

3. She's completely right. Video games are overly sexist.

And two counters:

1. This isn't just a problem with games, its a problem with media in general. See also: Hollywood and any commercial on a major network dealing with: food, laundry, yogurt, beer, cars, and any kind of yardwork tool or garage tool.

2. Why does she need money for a video blog series? Not to agree with the third guy you quoted, but... What does that money go towards?

Good sir, I take offense to that, I have also met youtube commenters older than 13 years old.
I myself indulge in posting comments on youtube every once in a while and whilst I am male, I am not 13-17 nor do I take offense to homosexual Shephard.

Also, I don't know any good rape jokes.
NONE, so could someone please give me an example of what is considered a rape-joke?
Will trade for dead baby jokes.

Well since you asked

Schadrach:

socialistmath:

Schadrach:

Do we? What other crimes do we pursue and sometimes convict on nothing other than victim testimony? What other crime can you say "That 51 year old man committed this crime against me 36 years ago when he was babysitting", and get a conviction with no other evidence (more importantly, how would you defend against that?)? Or for a better example, imagine the person you lost your virginity with (if such a person exists) decided tomorrow to claim that encounter was rape/sexual assault (depending on the genders involved, since forced intercourse isn't rape if it's female-on-male). How would you defend yourself? As far as I can tell, the only answers are video every sexual encounter, and don't stick it in the crazy (always good advice).

"B-b-but what about people accused of rape!?" Really? You bring up bullshit about false rape accusations? Do you have any idea of how statistically insignificant those accusations are? Do you not understand how much bullshit a woman goes through when she dares to accuse a man of rape? Why would any woman want to go through all that?

So, are you suggesting that women are incapable of deceit, or that we should pretend that they aren't because it only throws some men under the bus? Most of the studies on the topic end up with results in the 2-11% range[1], mostly depending on what instrument they use. Quite a few [2] come up with much larger numbers than that, but usually have a methodology that some disagree with (such as assuming that when an alleged victim recants that means the recanted accusation was false). Something occurring with a frequency that according to more conservative methodologies could be as frequent as 1 in 9 cases is *not* statistically insignificant.

As for why a woman might falsely accuse someone of rape, sexual assault, or domestic violence, that seems to vary pretty broadly from case to case. A cursory search seems to run everything from divorce and custody cases [3] to avoiding being caught cheating to using it to provide an excuse for her own violence [4] to sometimes even something as trivial as dodging a cab fare [5]. People are individuals, and as such, there's no singular reason they might decide to lie.

socialistmath:

Rape cases need to be thoroughly investigated, tried if there's evidence, held to the same goddamned standards as every other criminal case, if there's a finding of guilt, punished appropriately, and if there's evidence that it's a false accusation, then that needs to be thoroughly investigated, tried if there's evidence, held to the same goddamned standards as every other criminal case,

Regardless of whatever men's rights activists vomit out of their putrid mouths, rape already is held to those standards.

Name another crime, any other crime, where the allegation and testimony of the victim is proof enough to get a conviction with no corroborating evidence. Name another crime where you'd accept an accusation alone as proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused was guilty.

socialistmath:

[yes, I am saying falsely accusing someone of a sex crime should itself be a sex crime]).

You're mentally ill if you seriously think this. Seriously? You equate the false accusation of rape to rape itself?

No, I'm not equating it to rape. Maybe you should look at the full breadth of things that count as "sex crimes" and thus yield getting your scarlet "A." I'm saying it should count as a "sex crime", thus yielding mandatory registration on the sex offender registry and some meaningful punishment (as opposed to the current situation which in most jurisdictions is a fine [akin to a bad speeding ticket, but without the points on your license]).

socialistmath:

Likewise, I think the media should be barred from naming either defendant or victim in such a case (as opposed to the current practice of anonymizing the victim and plastering the defendant's name everywhere, thus effectively ruining his reputation even if innocent).

"Think of the poor rapists' reputation!"

Did I say a damned word about keeping anonymous those found guilty? You appear to want to be sure that anyone accused, even if falsely, "gets what they deserve" as you put it below? While ensuring that anyone who makes a false accusation is free to know that no one will ever know what kind of horrible person they are?

socialistmath:

If the defendant is found anything other than guilty, I think the defendant's name should not be released. If there's a false accusation case, I think a finding of guilt should involve releasing the false accuser's name, but letting the falsely accused remain anonymous.

Let me guess, you want their name made public so they can get what they deserve, right?

Didn't say that. I want their name made public because they are guilty of a terrible act, and they shouldn't be guaranteed protection from people knowing that.

Wanetta Gibson is actually a good recent example of this (you would agree that the victim stating outright "No, he did not rape me, but I don't want to clear his name because I might have to pay back the large sum of money I fraudulently sued the school for" counts as clear evidence of a case of false accusation, right?). No, I don't want her to "get what she deserves" (I don't even like that you are implying that), but I don't think she should never have to deal with the fallout of that choice. You would, as I understand it, want her to be kept anonymous forever, because she shouldn't have to be responsible for that terrible thing she did, right? I personally think in a just world, she'd see some jail time, be put on the registry, and have all future wages garnished to start paying back from her fraudulent suit (though I doubt given what she did she'd be terribly employable).

After all of that I feel I need to reiterate that I don't believe all rape accusations are false, or women need to be "put in their place" for daring to accuse a man of a crime he committed, or any other ridiculous exaggeration you might concoct. Actual rape happens, should be investigated, and the rapist brought to justice and appropriately punished. However women, by virtue of being human, are not perfect fonts of honesty and are fully capable of being just as malevolent as any man, and false accusations are a uniquely gendered avenue through which this can occur. Those engaging in such things need to be investigated, tried, and if guilty punished.

JerrytheBullfrog:

Jessica Valenti.
Clarisse Thorn.
Hugo Schwyze.
Alyssa Rosenberg.
Pretty much everyone at Feministing.
No seriously, what about teh menz, those guys.
Rebecca Watson.

That's just a number of prominent feminists I found just on my fucking twitter page who are all reasonable as hell.

Hmm, a quick Googling turns up something a bit unpleasant about Valenti (specifically an article in which it sounds an awful lot like she wants the burden of proof in rape cases to lie with the accused in an article about Julian Assange [quoted below]), and Hugo is generally ugh (I find it interesting that he's such a popular male feminist though, given that he's a professor who used to sleep with his female students, almost murdered an ex girlfriend, may have fathered a child that he helped the mother pretend was her other boyfriend's because she wanted to marry the stable one with the good job, acts an awful lot like a recovering addict using "feminism" as a movement as his sponsor, pretends that all men everywhere are exactly like him and all the dirtbag things he's done before, and tends to take the view that women have no agency at all since they seem never to be responsible for their own actions). NSWATM is usually pretty reasonable, though they occasionally have their off days (actually been reading it since it's launch though I despise the new format since they've moved to Good Men Project). Clarrise isn't too bad either. Haven't read any Rosenberg. Feministing is a bit hit and miss. At least you didn't use Pandagon, Shakesville, or RadicalHub as your examples.

Jessica Valenti:
Swedish rape laws ... go much further than U.S. laws do, and we should look to them as a potential model for our own legislation.

In fact, some activists and legal experts in Sweden want to change the law there so that the burden of proof is on the accused...[6]

JerrytheBullfrog:
Feminism = not a monolith. Or shall I get Anders Breivik to represent all gamers?

Feminism is not a monolith has two effects. One, it allows a No True Scotsman argument while pretending that's not what is being done. Imagine I claimed "Republicans (to pick a group I gathered you don't like given you've accused me of being right wing[personally, I'm registered independent in large part because I can't figure out why one's positions on freedom of speech, abortion, and gun control should in any way be remotely related -- as an aside I <3 ACLU, pro-choice, and pro-gun]) are not a monolith", therefore you can't take any statement from or about any of them as even being an example of things they say, even when that statement is fueld by their Republican-hood. Or Democrats, or Neonazis, or MRAs. In fact I'm pretty sure I can argue that since "Neonazis are not a monolith", that it's impossible to demonstrate that Neonazis are racist scum because some other unnamed and unknowable Neonazi "isn't like that."

On the converse, since FINAM means that almost no beliefs are actually feminist ones, thus it sets the bar really really low to count as a feminist. In fact, if the bar is "believes men and women should have equal rights and responsibilities wherever possible, and equivalent ones when equal ones are literally impossible", then *I* count as a feminist. In fact, almost everyone you meet is, even if a lot of them wouldn't use that label because of all the other things that seem to get attached to it.

Anders Breivik seems to be a one off case, I can't point to dozens of examples of people like him. I *can* point to dozens of examples of people identifying as feminist saying terrible, terrible things, often in books used in the academic study of feminism afterward, and not as examples of one-off nutjobs (influential feminists from the 70s tend to fill this hole readily, for example).

JerrytheBullfrog:
(Also, spoiler alert, but the divorce-custody thing? Is also an example of sexism against women - we give custody to women more often because society forces them into the nurturing caregiver role, so clearly the mom MUST be the better child rearer - that also happens to hurt men. HUH.)

Ah, yes, the old "anything that screws men specifically is really about women" argument. Got a version of it for why men commit suicide at a dramatically higher rate than women, but we still focus suicide prevention selectively at women?

wetnap:
or someone working the mines digging coal until you die.

Damnit, I'm playing Minecraft completely wrong, aren't I? =p

JerrytheBullfrog:
As a guy who used to be as fucking willfully blind as you, I have seen rape culture for a fact.

Care to provide some evidence? I'm actually interested, because it always seems like underpants gnome logic to me:

1. Someone tells a joke that references rape in any fashion/makes somthing that loosely implies rape.
2. ???
3. Rapists feel better about being rapists, so more actual rape happens.

I can't come up with an example that doesn't also require nearly the entire game industry and most of the movie and TV industries to be promoting a "murder culture" wherein murder is trivialized and normalized and actual murders should be skyrocketing for the past few decades. But that doesn't match reality at all.

greatorder:
gotta say, the insult 'ovendodger' is new to me...

Yeah, I'd never heard that one before either. Is it supposed to be like calling someone a draft dodger except their not in the kitchen so their dodging the oven? Or am I supposed to be building a trebuchet with which to fire ovens at feminist icons? Actually that last one could make for an interesting game concept, maybe bonus points for hitting Valerie Solanas before she can shoot you?

lizabeth19:
Oh dear Lord. Maybe this thread should be renamed "Feminist commentator has opinion, internet has conniptions".

Seriously, I bet if I started a thread entitled "Maybe the feminists are right...", I would get a couple of hundred views in a matter of minutes.

You can't do that. Feminsits cannot be right about anythnig, because they hold no positions despite having strong opinions about everything.

Brian MacInnes:
Oops! Who ever was in charge of assembling this openly gynemasculinistic project's head montage haplessly included a Princess Peach illustration from no less than 'Super Princess Peach'. That would be the one in which she heroically advents to rescue the helpless Mario and Luigi from Bowser, decimating his army on the way. Also fearless tomb raider Lara Croft, among others.

It's also the game where she decimates Bowser's army by using her mighty mood swings. So, yeah, sorry, she'll rip Super Princess Peach a new one.

animehermit:

SOCIALCONSTRUCT:
Generally speaking men are much better firefighters than women. Organic cultural perceptions are built around patterns that are generally true rather than exceptions. I prefer this organic viewpoint to PC tabula rasa nonsense.

Just because men CAN be better at firefighting, doesn't mean that we shouldn't allow women to also be firefighters. I'm sure every woman currently employed as a firefighter is better at it then I am.

So long as they are held to the same standards as the men, they certainly should be. When you start holding them to a separate lesser standard because not enough are passing, then there's a problem.

I actually find the case with the boy on the girl's field hockey team interesting. You know, the one where there's no boys team so he's on the girls team and people have tried to kick him off for being good at the game? I've seen a *lot* of people feel it's unfair for him to use a Title IX argument because he's "not a protected class."

Father Time:

Society and the media seem to jump on their side a lot. See duke lacrosse where everyone immediately assumed the college kids were guilty until it became painfully clear they weren't. I can't think of a big shitstorm where everyone sided with the accused.

Also saying you support something is saying you are actively rooting for it which he is not.

You know why I didn't footnote Duke Lacrosse or Hofstra as examples above? Because I wanted more recent ones to avoid the whole "see you have to go back a very long time just to find one example, it's not really important" argument I've seen before.

Ok...

Also I've heard that women attempt suicide more often than men but fail at a higher rate.

My source is George Carlin and I trust that man.

[1] New York Rape Squad (1974), Hursch and Selkin (1974), Kelly et al. (2005), Geis (1978), Smith (1989), U.S. Department of Justice (1997), Clark and Lewis (1977), Harris and Grace (1999), Lea et al. (2003), HMCPSI/HMIC (2002)
[2] McCahill et al. (1979), Philadelphia police study (1968), Chambers and Millar (1983), Grace et al. (1992), Jordan (2004), Kanin (1994), Gregory and Lees (1996), Maclean (1979), Stewart (1981)

Father Time:
*snip*

Ok...

Also I've heard that women attempt suicide more often than men but fail at a higher rate.

My source is George Carlin and I trust that man.

Is it bad that I didn't notice just how much of a wall-o-text I had until you quoted me? I fully expect someone will pick a single sentence out of it and make an out of context argument though, that is usually how posts longer than a paragraph work out.

CAPTCHA: "take an umbrella" -- No, CAPTCHA, I think an asbestos suit is more appropriate...

Schadrach:

greatorder:
gotta say, the insult 'ovendodger' is new to me...

Yeah, I'd never heard that one before either. Is it supposed to be like calling someone a draft dodger except their not in the kitchen so their dodging the oven? Or am I supposed to be building a trebuchet with which to fire ovens at feminist icons? Actually that last one could make for an interesting game concept, maybe bonus points for hitting Valerie Solanas before she can shoot you?

Could be, or it could be an antisemitic comment. As in, dodging the ovens at Auschwitz.

Ukomba:

Schadrach:

greatorder:
gotta say, the insult 'ovendodger' is new to me...

Yeah, I'd never heard that one before either. Is it supposed to be like calling someone a draft dodger except their not in the kitchen so their dodging the oven? Or am I supposed to be building a trebuchet with which to fire ovens at feminist icons? Actually that last one could make for an interesting game concept, maybe bonus points for hitting Valerie Solanas before she can shoot you?

Could be, or it could be an antisemitic comment. As in, dodging the ovens at Auschwitz.

Ah, I'd completely forgotten that the trolling horde was attacking her for "Jew" as well.

I'm just going to point out one of the best characters in games, period. The fact she's female is irrelevant to her character, but she's female. So apparantly that's important. I always thought good characters were good characters, regardless of gender.

Alyx Vance.

Pure and simply, Alyx Vance.

Firstly, let's get the usual issue in games out of the way, that most women look like a sitck with four balloons nailed in various places and the face of a porn star. Alyx does not. She looks like a normal person, albeit slightly better than the average resident of the depressing world of half-life 2, she's built like a normal person, she's pretty, sure, but not like she spent forty minutes getting ready. She looks like a pretty woman, but a realistic one.

How she acts comes next. Through the entire game, Alyx acts in character consistently, and wonderfully. She cares for her friends, she is unafraid in the face of danger, she is smart, she is confident, but scared when anyone would be scard. Some moments will now be listed, because as the old saying goes, actions speak louder than words.

Firstly, the moment when she's trapped under a stalker, with it screaming in her face. She is terrified, because she's not strong enough to lift off the weight of a large metal carriage with most of what was once a human on top of her. She recoils from the horror screaming at her, and tells gordon to shift the damn thing. This is the same woman who hours ago (in-game) was running around a street under fire, defying the leader of a corrupt administration and aiding our mute hero in his final battle, probably scared, but overcoming fear to help in any way she could. Faced with a muted, horifically scarred human, she breaks down. Because of empathy. She knows what they once were, and she feels horrified by the process. As did I. It's natural.

Instead of any further moments, a point of comparison to another character, that bitch from WET, so unremarkable I can't even remember her name, but her character still sticks in my head like an insect sting. Because it was terrible to behold. Whoever wrote that character I hope was doing it as satire, because if the intention was to depict a strong woman, all they did was create a bitch. Strong women do not pick fights with anyone they want to, utter dicks do that. Regardless of gender. Forget even the use of the phrase "strong woman". Good characters are good characters, regardless of gender, and one of the problems I see is that to avoid the idea of creating a female stereotype of a damsel hiding behind the heroes absurdly muscled shoulders, writers can fall into the other side of the hole, writing an unlikeable character with no redeeming qualities, with a hair-trigger temper, a lust for vioilence when unecessary, and no sensetivity whatsoever. Strong female characters are not some kind of code to crack, they are strong characters with two X chromosomes.

In response to an argument i've just created, (that being the idea that female characters are often only acting in response to a "strong male lead"), the whole point of a good character for me is what they might have done when the player character is not around. Alyx for example, I can imagine her helping the resistance (or what is was before Freeman and Alyx attacked Nova Prospect), disrupting the combine's movement wherever she could, doing what had to be done in Eli's lab, welding, metalwork, target practice whenever she could, relaxing, showering, playing with DOG. Stuff normal people do in a post-apocalyptic world. Try imagining that with other characters, male or female, it always gave me an idea of what a good character was. Someone you could imagine going along with life when you, the PC, left.

Father Time:

Calibanbutcher:

tehweave:
Five things.

1. It's youtube commenters. They're 13-17 year old boys who have never touched a boob before. It's the same commenters who drastically hated the male shepherd sex scene from Mass Effect 3.

2. It looks like she got her project funded, so... Good.

3. She's completely right. Video games are overly sexist.

And two counters:

1. This isn't just a problem with games, its a problem with media in general. See also: Hollywood and any commercial on a major network dealing with: food, laundry, yogurt, beer, cars, and any kind of yardwork tool or garage tool.

2. Why does she need money for a video blog series? Not to agree with the third guy you quoted, but... What does that money go towards?

Good sir, I take offense to that, I have also met youtube commenters older than 13 years old.
I myself indulge in posting comments on youtube every once in a while and whilst I am male, I am not 13-17 nor do I take offense to homosexual Shephard.

Also, I don't know any good rape jokes.
NONE, so could someone please give me an example of what is considered a rape-joke?
Will trade for dead baby jokes.

Well since you asked

Well, I am a man of my word, so here you go:

animehermit:

SOCIALCONSTRUCT:
Generally speaking men are much better firefighters than women. Organic cultural perceptions are built around patterns that are generally true rather than exceptions. I prefer this organic viewpoint to PC tabula rasa nonsense.

Just because men CAN be better at firefighting, doesn't mean that we shouldn't allow women to also be firefighters. I'm sure every woman currently employed as a firefighter is better at it then I am.

I don't know of anyone (IRL that is, and with the power to affect it, not some anon-enabling forum[U-2b]) generally saying women shouldn't be firefighters. And women can be as good a firefighter as men, but if you lower the physical standards for being a firefighter just so you can meet some BS gender quota you help no one (as happened in LA some years back). Same with the military and most other physically demanding jobs. Gender equality shouldn't mean a lower standard for a gender and I would think women would be insulted to be held to one.

JerrytheBullfrog:

bringer of illumination:

Actually no, no it fucking isn't.

This sort of shit happens ALL the god damn time, and it isn't reported on because it isn't fucking news. Do you have any idea how easy these things are to organize? (And the degree of "organisation" in this particular case is debatable.

This article is OBVIOUS as veiled advertisement for the kickstarter in question, the writer want to plug this horseshit, and the easiest way was to write about the backlash.

It's a load of shit and whoever approved it should be ashamed of them selves.

Welllll, I've seen at least four other major gaming sites besides the Escapist report on it so, I think that yeah, it actually is pretty fucking newsworthy.

It is an ugly mirror to the misogynist side of videogaming, particularly so soon after the Hitman controversy and now the Tomb Raider rape controversy. It's time to do some navel gazing as a subculture and industry. So... yeah. Newsworthy.

If I were the one who approved this post I would be fucking proud as hell, not ashamed

No matter how many sites report on it, that doesn't make it any more news worthy.

No matter how vile it is, the Youtube comment section is NEVER news worthy, because the Youtube comment comment section is ALWAYS vile.

Reporting on this sort of shit is basically masturbation.

But like I said, this is obviously veiled advertisement for the Kickstarter, and I frankly find it tasteless.

JerrytheBullfrog:

Pretty much everyone at Feministing.

You mean this site?
http://community.feministing.com/2010/02/25/more-media-victim-blaming-and-dehumanization/
The same site that called a story where a man was put away for 4 years on a false rape charge a "mundane perjury case",then went on to say the headline was implying women were meant to get raped,and that fighting back was wrong.
Bad example.

bringer of illumination:

No matter how many sites report on it, that doesn't make it any more news worthy.

No matter how vile it is, the Youtube comment section is NEVER news worthy, because the Youtube comment comment section is ALWAYS vile.

Reporting on this sort of shit is basically masturbation.

But like I said, this is obviously veiled advertisement for the Kickstarter, and I frankly find it tasteless.

I just want to add onto this as well. Also just cause she claims or apparently sells her work to schools, colleges and universities doesn't actually make her work legitimate or educational in any sense.

Should we honestly take people who go to religious universities that major in creationism as part of the educated culture? Or people who sell "holistic" healing methods to hospitals despite no actual testing using the scientific method?

I actually sat down and honestly watched her work and the comments and notice that she is heavily into censorship and completely biased and even when you get rational people that want to offer a dissent she is extremely defensive that she would rather shut down a conversation instead of actually talking cause she is just that certain she is correct in all things.

But what I'd really like to ask for all these people who claim to really want more "strong female characters" in video games is this. Shouldn't we be pursuing the liberty and freedom for any developer to create ANY type of character they want instead of having their hands tied to our own actual world stifling their imagination?

Shouldn't we allow developers, writers, artists the freedom to use old-fashioned literary devices that have existed and be eternally told throughout human history like the "damsel in distress" and not be scrutinized by people like this youtuber as being a misogynist?

After all the whole point of literature, art, video games is to enable people to create characters, worlds, universes without any sort of hindrance for better or for worse. We shouldn't be trying to force developers to create what this youtuber wants when they want to create characters like Duke Nukem or Kirby.

The other big problem is that this youtuber is trying to say that all these video game characters and their archtypes have never existed before in history and omits all historical context in relation to the time and demographics of said time. For example why would she be saying that Miyamoto's character Princess Toadstool/Peach is a problem in the video game industry today when she was originally created back in the 1980's? How does the statistics of the ESA of 2011 matter in relation to the infancy of the video game industry after the great video game crash of the 1980's where it was a risk buying an NES? She isn't going to be addressing these issues at all. What you will get is how every single archtype she can dig up is somehow sexist against women and that these literary devices and archtypes should be eliminated from the world altogether and that is destructive as it hinders the most important resource developers and writers have, their imagination. She honestly cares more about her opinion than any actual intellectual honesty cause it is how she is getting her meal ticket just like any other extremist that range from religion, politics and so on.

Tenmar:

Shouldn't we allow developers, writers, artists the freedom to use old-fashioned literary devices that have existed and be eternally told throughout human history like the "damsel in distress" and not be scrutinized by people like this youtuber as being a misogynist?

Haha what? Do you seriously think that critical media consumption encroaches on artist freedom?

Father Time:

JerrytheBullfrog:

Father Time:

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

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

Also I don't see why I should stop telling jokes just because other people (people I'm not telling the jokes too) believe stupid things.

I don't actually know any rape jokes that have victim blaming.

Those are denied by a handful of lone crazies who are ostracized by society.

Rape victims are challenged BY society.

Try again.

Blablahb:
Then you are shameless, without any form of decency, out of your mind, and not worth responding to. Go away and take your accusations of people supporting rape elsewhere.

But as it happens, thanks for proving feminists are indeed insane.

Awwww, I'm sowwy, did I huwt your pwecious fee-fees? The idea that your actions and words could be indirectly supporting a culture that trivializes rape sucks, doesn't it? You know what sucks more? Being on the other end of that culture.

You just keep digging your hole deeper, bucko. And btw, thanks for inserting "rape" where I say "rape culture" to twist my words into an argument you can more easily defend against with indignation. That's not underhanded at all.

I am telling you. I have fucking seen the consequences of my actions. As a guy who used to be as fucking willfully blind as you, I have seen rape culture for a fact. That you refuse to listen and consider becoming a better person is wholly on your shoulders, not mine.

Society and the media seem to jump on their side a lot. See duke lacrosse where everyone immediately assumed the college kids were guilty until it became painfully clear they weren't. I can't think of a big shitstorm where everyone sided with the accused.

Also saying you support something is saying you are actively rooting for it which he is not.

So soon we forget the lessons of Dominique Strauss-Kahn, eh?

Father Time:

hentropy:
instead of an older woman who might be just as capable, or even a small group of people. Why not a story about a mom trying to lead her kid(s) through the end times? It feels wrong to most people because guys can be the only ones who are strong and resilient enough to provide leadership in such a situation, where women always have to be under their wing.

I hate the implication that fiction needs quotas in their characters.

Having the protagonist be a women (and especially her mother) would change their relationship and how they interact with each other. It would be a different story.

It would probably make the story something fresh, interesting, and more enjoyable to sit through than another game about a male leading a girl through a dangerous world. It's not about quotas and doing things for the sake of it, it's about going over uncovered territory and progressing the medium.

bringer of illumination:

Skratt:

bringer of illumination:
Okay, I'm done.

If this is what passes for journalism on the Escapist, then the Escapist can go fuck itself.

Goodbye, you won't be seeing me again.

Oh, was the ovendodger comment yours?

Oh for fuck's sake, I knew some smartass would crawl from the woodwork with some shit like this, I knew I said I wouldn't ever comment again, but I'll be fucked if I'm not gonna defend myself.

No, the comment wasn't mine, the fact that I think this kickstarter project is a load of horseshit* is irrelevant to my post, and has nothing to do with her being Jewish.

What I have a problem with is that this article is a piece of garbage of no POSSIBLE interest to anyone.

"OH NO! PEOPLE ARE BEING MEAN AND WACIST ON THE INTERWEBS!!!" You might as well link to any given thread on fucking 4chan and call that "Journalism".

I frankly can't fucking believe that this article was approved.

*Incidentally, if you want to know why I think it's horseshit, this video is a nice place to start:

So, people being racist asshats on the internet is unworthy of having attention heaped upon it because it happens all the time?

Oh I disagree. This kind of shit needs to be brought up again and again and again until the bad behavior goes away. This kind of shit is never okay and should never be accepted. Yes, it's true you can't fight every fight, but when somebody makes a kickstarter project about video games - whatever topic on video games they choose - I would EXPECT to see it here as news if at the onset of said project the comment section began filling with hate speech.

Of course the Youtube community is full of jackasses, that's unsurprising. It is surprising how this is being put up as a necessary message though. Simply put, everyone I know who is reasonable enough to say, appreciate a feminist critique of gaming culture, is already aware of the issue. Sexism in gaming is so explicit that it hardly warrants an analysis, the only people who would benefit from such a thing are the same types who post these hateful comments, so they certainly wont be viewing the videos.

I am concerned by, what appears to me, to be manipulative behavior on the part of the video creator, this sums it up nicely:

Tenmar:

I just want to add onto this as well. Also just cause she claims or apparently sells her work to schools, colleges and universities doesn't actually make her work legitimate or educational in any sense.

Her legitimacy can be severely questioned, especially if she has decided to use her apparently significant knowledge to tackle an issue which is immediately and fully apparent to anyone who could be bothered by it. Furthermore, that's a lofty kickstarter goal for a video series especially when she apparently has the video equipment already on hand.

Long story short, i can't see this accomplishing anything other than giving this woman money, and if she is as qualified as she claims to be then i don't see how she could see it accomplishing anything either. Seems to me like an attempt to capitalize on the type of "intellectual superiority" so many people on the internet think they possess.

Schadrach:
Hmm, a quick Googling turns up something a bit unpleasant about Valenti (specifically an article in which it sounds an awful lot like she wants the burden of proof in rape cases to lie with the accused in an article about Julian Assange (quoted below)), and Hugo is generally ugh (I find it interesting that he's such a popular male feminist though, given that he's a professor who used to sleep with his female students, almost murdered an ex girlfriend, may have fathered a child that he helped the mother pretend was her other boyfriend's because she wanted to marry the stable one with the good job, acts an awful lot like a recovering addict using "feminism" as a movement as his sponsor, pretends that all men everywhere are exactly like him and all the dirtbag things he's done before, and tends to take the view that women have no agency at all since they seem never to be responsible for their own actions). NSWATM is usually pretty reasonable, though they occasionally have their off days (actually been reading it since it's launch though I despise the new format since they've moved to Good Men Project). Clarrise isn't too bad either. Haven't read any Rosenberg. Feministing is a bit hit and miss. At least you didn't use Pandagon, Shakesville, or RadicalHub as your examples.

I'll agree that Schwyze is problematic as an individual, and the stuff you mention is actually why I'm hesitant to personally get more involved in feminist stuff than what I already do - donating money, arguing about it with guys who don't get it, etc - because I've done some pretty problematic fucking things in the past and don't want to be like you say, the recovering addict using feminism as a sponsor. But a lot of what he's written speaks to me, and I think that it is important to have male voices to educate other men.

I haven't read Valenti's response to the Assange case, but you can't tell me that it's not troubling to have so many people immediately defend the dude because they like his political beliefs. It's the same kind of thing that pisses me off when an athlete is accused of rape/sexual assault and immediately everyone launches to defend them because they're fans of his team.

Rosenberg writes for ThinkProgress, if you have any progressive views whatsoever I recommend checking her out. And Watson is I think the single most prominent feminist atheist/skeptic, so if that's something that's important to you then she might be worth looking into.

Feminism is not a monolith has two effects. One, it allows a No True Scotsman argument while pretending that's not what is being done. Imagine I claimed "Republicans (to pick a group I gathered you don't like given you've accused me of being right wing[personally, I'm registered independent in large part because I can't figure out why one's positions on freedom of speech, abortion, and gun control should in any way be remotely related -- as an aside I <3 ACLU, pro-choice, and pro-gun]) are not a monolith", therefore you can't take any statement from or about any of them as even being an example of things they say, even when that statement is fueld by their Republican-hood. Or Democrats, or Neonazis, or MRAs. In fact I'm pretty sure I can argue that since "Neonazis are not a monolith", that it's impossible to demonstrate that Neonazis are racist scum because some other unnamed and unknowable Neonazi "isn't like that."

On the converse, since FINAM means that almost no beliefs are actually feminist ones, thus it sets the bar really really low to count as a feminist. In fact, if the bar is "believes men and women should have equal rights and responsibilities wherever possible, and equivalent ones when equal ones are literally impossible", then *I* count as a feminist. In fact, almost everyone you meet is, even if a lot of them wouldn't use that label because of all the other things that seem to get attached to it.

Anders Breivik seems to be a one off case, I can't point to dozens of examples of people like him. I *can* point to dozens of examples of people identifying as feminist saying terrible, terrible things, often in books used in the academic study of feminism afterward, and not as examples of one-off nutjobs (influential feminists from the 70s tend to fill this hole readily, for example).

Well, in all fairness, Second Wave feminism, Dworkin et al, they were active in a very different time than this one. That was the rise of radical feminism, and a lot of Third/Fourth-wave feminists don't hold to what they believe. I mean, I see a lot of pro-sex and even pro-porn (at least pro-not-exploitative-porn) feminism these days. Dworkin would have had a heart attack.

But I don't agree with Dworkin's writings. I don't agree with absolutely everything Valenti writes, though I admire her intellect and think she's a great modern voice for young people dipping their toes into the feminist sea. Even now you had the RadFem conference where a bunch of other feminists attacked the organizers for refusing to admit MtF transwomen on the basis that they weren't biologically women. There are tons of splinter groups and ideologies, and to conflate the RadFems of the world with the NSWATM writers or Clarisse Thorn is just as intellectually dishonest as if I were to accuse a libertarian of being a member of the Moral Majority just because they both vote republican.

And yes, that is the definition of a feminist. What you quoted just there. Congratulations, you count as a feminist :)

It may surprise you, but the end goal of feminism actually IS equality for men and women. But as women are still the disadvantaged and marginalized sex, that involves dismantling a lot of our social constructs, even - or rather, especially the ones we don't think about.

Ah, yes, the old "anything that screws men specifically is really about women" argument. Got a version of it for why men commit suicide at a dramatically higher rate than women, but we still focus suicide prevention selectively at women?

That was never my argument. My argument is that it doesn't exist in a vacuum, and dismantling the sexist constructs of society in that case will help both men and women.

I haven't looked at suicide statistics in a while, so this is just me talking off the top of my head, but don't women ATTEMPT more often, whereas men succeed more often? (IIRC, because it's methods - women are more likely to try pill ODs and wrist cutting whereas men are more likely to hang themselves and use guns). But again, this is a double edged sword - in our society, women are more emotional and weepy and need coddling because they're weaker, whereas men are big and strong and deal with their problems on their own.

Ergo, suicide programs directed at women (because of sexist assumptions) instead of men (because of sexist assumptions) that end up harming men.

Or, how about that hubbub over the Scholastic "How to Survive..." books? Boys got all the cool stuff like "How to survive an alligator attack," whereas girls got "how to survive a BFF fight" or "how to survive a party you don't like." Again, playing into stereotypes both ways; the boys get adventure, the girls get social stuff... but when you think about it, the girls' book is teaching the kids how to deal with situations that might actually come up in everyday life. The boys don't get that.

Sexist stereotypes on the part of our culture (tend to) hurt women more than men, but they hurt men too. But on the other hand, it's not good to just point at "HEY LOOK MEN BEING HURT" without thinking where those assumptions are coming from and recognizing that they STILL stem from sexist assumptions.

Care to provide some evidence? I'm actually interested, because it always seems like underpants gnome logic to me:

1. Someone tells a joke that references rape in any fashion/makes somthing that loosely implies rape.
2. ???
3. Rapists feel better about being rapists, so more actual rape happens.

I can't come up with an example that doesn't also require nearly the entire game industry and most of the movie and TV industries to be promoting a "murder culture" wherein murder is trivialized and normalized and actual murders should be skyrocketing for the past few decades. But that doesn't match reality at all.

Unfortunately, I cannot, as all my evidence is anecdotal and relies on things I have said and done in the past as a man who was unaware of my own privilege and how my actions affected the women around me. I can say that knowing what I know now, so much of it was a product of rape culture that it's staggering and kind of sickening.

So if I seem overly aggressive about this whole thing, that's why. Because in all these discussions I see guys who remind me of myself five years ago. And I know that you're basically all good people who certainly have no intentions of ever hurting the women in your life, like I was.

But with the blinders on, it might just happen. So I'm just trying to help all of you take those goddamn blinders OFF for once.

(Also, murder victims are not blamed for the murder or doubted in the way that rape victims are. Which is arguably the single most prevalent form of rape culture; the doubting/blaming of victims)

I've seen studies that say that less than 10% of rapists ever see prison, whether it's because their crimes are never reported or there's no evidence because victims are frequently doubted.

Are you really okay with that? That doesn't make your blood boil?

bringer of illumination:

JerrytheBullfrog:

bringer of illumination:

Actually no, no it fucking isn't.

This sort of shit happens ALL the god damn time, and it isn't reported on because it isn't fucking news. Do you have any idea how easy these things are to organize? (And the degree of "organisation" in this particular case is debatable.

This article is OBVIOUS as veiled advertisement for the kickstarter in question, the writer want to plug this horseshit, and the easiest way was to write about the backlash.

It's a load of shit and whoever approved it should be ashamed of them selves.

Welllll, I've seen at least four other major gaming sites besides the Escapist report on it so, I think that yeah, it actually is pretty fucking newsworthy.

It is an ugly mirror to the misogynist side of videogaming, particularly so soon after the Hitman controversy and now the Tomb Raider rape controversy. It's time to do some navel gazing as a subculture and industry. So... yeah. Newsworthy.

If I were the one who approved this post I would be fucking proud as hell, not ashamed

No matter how many sites report on it, that doesn't make it any more news worthy.

No matter how vile it is, the Youtube comment section is NEVER news worthy, because the Youtube comment comment section is ALWAYS vile.

Reporting on this sort of shit is basically masturbation.

But like I said, this is obviously veiled advertisement for the Kickstarter, and I frankly find it tasteless.

If a bunch of professional journalists find it newsworthy (and it goes so far beyond the YouTube comments, what *I'm* disappointed in is the failure to cover that here), then yeah, it's pretty newsworthy. Sorry, try again.

Skratt:

Oh I disagree. This kind of shit needs to be brought up again and again and again until the bad behavior goes away. This kind of shit is never okay and should never be accepted.

But that's the thing about the internet, that kind of shit is never ok and shouldn't be accepted but it will be perpetuated BECAUSE the internet can and is anonymous. It IS the filth that is 4chan at its base. For example, I can be for a crime and point out the people against said crime are religious zealots and they are consumed by illogical something something because I link to a study done by people who happen to think just like me and all I need are a bunch of proxy's and different hardware and I can perpetuate a myth that only icky zealot religious people support X.

I accept the internet at its core, a desert wasteland of ideas that produce a jewel of truth every now and then.

A real debate might be what one considered a jewel from the obvious wasteland...

Well, that awful and terrible.

I'm glad someone is bringing this up and I hope it causes a up-roar to smack some sense into both the male community of gaming and the developers. I hope she gets the funding because it should be interesting.

To stop someone from bringing this up because I know someone will if they actually see this comment. I'm a white, homosexual male, therefore not agreeing with this because I am the same gender, just agreeing because of equality bitch.

Also, we should do Jim Sterlings answer to sexism in games, just make MORE SEXISM! YAAAY!

Gorumgol:

"Would be better if she filmed this in the kitchen," quips max 547490.

"She is a JEW," 614streets adds helpfully.

"ask money for making a fucking vlog? And you made it in a way that women should pledge for not being dominated by man. Smart and evil plan. You are the reason why womens are the inferior gender for the whole history of mankind," points out Armisael.

"fuck you feminist fucks you already have equality. Infact yo have better shit than most males, be glad what you got bitch. Also if you want equality, we talk to men like that too, so fuck off faggo.. I mean lesbian," says Arto572.

">video games are about doing hard work, thus men are a better choice you just went full retard," added ToxicHedgie.

"1:09 This controller looks so unused. I doubt that she is a real gamer. She just looked for a niche where she can distinguish herself with her feminist propaganda," is Tig3r0's expert opinion.

"Fucking downvoted and flagged for terrorism. Dumb ass nazi cunt," adds BoxxyizQueen.

Ah, true face of gaming community. Isn't it beautiful?

Sorry all I saw was obvious trolling that proves nothing about any "community".

That, and a laughable generalization on your part.

JerrytheBullfrog:

bringer of illumination:

JerrytheBullfrog:

Welllll, I've seen at least four other major gaming sites besides the Escapist report on it so, I think that yeah, it actually is pretty fucking newsworthy.

It is an ugly mirror to the misogynist side of videogaming, particularly so soon after the Hitman controversy and now the Tomb Raider rape controversy. It's time to do some navel gazing as a subculture and industry. So... yeah. Newsworthy.

If I were the one who approved this post I would be fucking proud as hell, not ashamed

No matter how many sites report on it, that doesn't make it any more news worthy.

No matter how vile it is, the Youtube comment section is NEVER news worthy, because the Youtube comment comment section is ALWAYS vile.

Reporting on this sort of shit is basically masturbation.

But like I said, this is obviously veiled advertisement for the Kickstarter, and I frankly find it tasteless.

If a bunch of professional journalists find it newsworthy (and it goes so far beyond the YouTube comments, what *I'm* disappointed in is the failure to cover that here), then yeah, it's pretty newsworthy. Sorry, try again.

"professional journalists"

Pfffft, HAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Oh god I'm fucking DYING!

I damn near shat myself.

There's absolutely no prerequisites to write for sites like this, come back when some legitimate journalists write about it.

JerrytheBullfrog:
[quote="Schadrach"](Also, murder victims are not blamed for the murder or doubted in the way that rape victims are. Which is arguably the single most prevalent form of rape culture; the doubting/blaming of victims)

I've seen studies that say that less than 10% of rapists ever see prison, whether it's because their crimes are never reported or there's no evidence because victims are frequently doubted.

first off, how do you record something that isn't reported? because don't you need to report something in order for someone to know its happened? or can you read minds now.

Secondly, when you say blamed, do you mean people say, "she deserved to get raped" or do you mean when someone says "maybe if we tell people not to walk down a dark secluded alley at night then they are less likely to be a victim of crime" because the second isn't blaming the victim, that's telling people that if they take responsibility for their own safety then this shit wont happen to them.

and most importantly, god forbid a man get a fair trial in a rape case. doubting someone's claim that someone raped them because their is no evidence to the accusers claim is not blaming the victim. what it is is the justice system doing what it is supposed to do, determined from the facts what really happened. Sorry but one persons word that something happened is not evidence it is simply an accusation and the fact of the matter is WOMEN CAN LIE!

if you throw a man in prison simply on an accusation with little to no evidence to support said claim is an injustice. you are ruining that man life simply on one persons word over his for the fact that they have a vagina and he dosnt. not to mention giving half the population the ability to imprison and ruin the lives the other half simply on an accusation gives that half of the population a metaphorical gun to hold up to anyone they don't like.

I often hear the phrase, "its better to be safe than sorry" or "if one potential rapist is off the streets then that stops the possibility of someone ells being raped"

Well i call bullshit! it is not better to be safe than sorry because if we do that we give up our rights. such as the right to a fair trial of your peers or the right to face your accuser.

as a great man once said:

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin

Masterdebator:

Sorry all I saw was obvious trolling that proves nothing about any "community".

That, and a laughable generalization on your part.

http://kotaku.com/5886674/bioware-writer-describes-her-gaming-tastes-angry-gamers-call-her-a-cancer

http://kotaku.com/5889637/sexual-harassment-is-a-joke-to-these-fighting-game-fans

And now this. The cases of 2012 I can think on the fly. Yap, there is no problem with the gaming community being full of sexist, racist pricks, nope. *sigh*

I just want to say, that as a woman and a gamer, and several other minority labels besides, I'm interested in seeing this woman's project go through, and in seeing an end to the hateful comments pointed her way. All she's doing is trying to raise fund for, apparently very thorough, research. Why do we treat research about our culture any differently than research about any other aspect of the universe? (Well, to answer my own question, because we desperately desire to preserve it because it is part of the foundation of our worldview and the glue that holds us as a cultural group together) Whatever the reason, is it so vital that we should stand in the way of research? No.

Does this research even touch on the other topics of feminism? No. It focuses on one narrow series of examples of it, the portrayal of women in games. The portrayal of ANYONE in games is a highly under-researched field, and we as gamers stand only to benefit by that being turned around. At first, these studies will focus on minority groups, but soon enough there will be plenty to go around about the white male meatslabs too. This is the nature of research.

Trekkie:

first off, how do you record something that isn't reported? because don't you need to report something in order for someone to know its happened? or can you read minds now.

Mostly because rapists are known to be repeat offenders, and while it only takes one woman to come forward to put him into jail, he can get away with numerous rapes before that one woman comes forward. And while many women will tell SOMEONE else about what occurred, a good number of them can't find the courage to come to court with evidence, or when they do, the hesitation on their part reflects not a deep inner turmoil (to do with religious perceptions of purity, and American perceptions of self-sufficiency, and a questioning of whether there was anything more she could have done to stop it) to the judge and jury, but dishonesty. Your statement, that women can lie, reflects this blame-the-victim bias so common in rape cases.

It is odd to me, that someone can accuse someone of measurable physical abuse, and when the measurements are taken and it proves that no physical abuse has occurred, that person is labled a liar or a madperson, but when that physical abuse happens to be rape, and the supposed victim happens to be a woman, it is not just that person who is the liar or the madperson, but everyone of that gender as well. Why not everyone of that complexion, or haircolor, or eyecolor, or stature?

TheKasp:

Masterdebator:

Sorry all I saw was obvious trolling that proves nothing about any "community".

That, and a laughable generalization on your part.

http://kotaku.com/5886674/bioware-writer-describes-her-gaming-tastes-angry-gamers-call-her-a-cancer

http://kotaku.com/5889637/sexual-harassment-is-a-joke-to-these-fighting-game-fans

And now this. The cases of 2012 I can think on the fly. Yap, there is no problem with the gaming community being full of sexist, racist pricks, nope. *sigh*

Understand that sexism and racism are socially systemic issue ingrained in our institutions and culture. Not some special "problem" for people who play video games.

Again, obvious trolling/ isolated comments from an isolated community blown out of proportion = all gamers are sexist, racist, ludicrously stupid journalism that fails to highlight anything but impossible to take seriously-comments that solidify personal beliefs without ever highlighting rational contrary views being consistently posted, etc. etc.

I'd really love for a "gaming journalist" to highlight one of thousands of rational comments left regarding this trope video and the Hepler matter, but I guess it's easier to take a troll comment at face value, instead of actually engaging or highlighting rationally thought out comments.

Anyway, I've made an hour long video on this matter, detailing what I think about this whole mess (largely because comments get lost into the endless internet vacuum) regarding allegations of sexism in gaming.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpssUwG-cOI&feature=plcp

Will post Part 2 when it finishes rendering.

Edit - Part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hW6qS3W37AQ&feature=plcp

Blablahb:
What about the causes that the good ones among those studies who actually look for causality ussually find? Those are generally that women don't negotiate for a raise as hard as men do, are too soft or pushy in management, more prone to interupt their careers and want to work in parttime more often and other personal factors.

All those things are personal choice, not some form of oppression.

No, you justifying that because individuals have diferent outlooks in life they shouldn't be treated equally is a form of opression. You linking individual choices to gender is straight-out discrimination.

Welcome to the world of misogyny.

Come to think of it I've never really encountered any study which proven institutionalised discrimination against women on a labour market in any egalitarian western society [snip]
So my first question ussually is: Discrimination against women? Nice. Be the first to show us where it is please?

Sure, simple Google search returns this in the top of the list:

http://usgovinfo.about.com/cs/censusstatistic/a/womenspay.htm

And a quote:

Despite a sense of continued progress toward gender equality in the workplace, the federal government has confirmed that the workplace earnings gap between men and women still persists today.

According to Government Accountability Office (GAO) Report GAO-04-35, the weekly earnings of full-time working women were about three-fourths of men's during 2001. The report was prepared from a study of the earnings history of over 9,300 Americans for the last 18 years.

Found that among others, on the top of the list. But if that is too complex, here's a simplified global vision: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_inequality

You also said:

Don't please don't respond with general statements if you fail to turn up said examples okay? It happens too often people search, can't find evidence of institutionalised discrimination, and then resort to 'but don't you know I'm right?!' type of statements because they can't admit that they were just assuming the existance of such discrimination.

If you couldn't find these as simply as I have, I'm betting you either didn't look, or didn't care for results that didn't fit your wordlview, so you resort to general statements as you cannot provide examples.

Welcome also to being a hypocrite.

I personally just love how belligerant men are in this thread about the evils of women and their secret agendas. Last time I checked, all your mothers, sisters, nieces daughters or girlfriends/wives happen to be women. That's really how you feel about them?

We're talking about people here, not some strange alien species with mishapen torsos. Start showing some empathy, or just lock yourself away where you can't hurt anyone else with your venomous attitudes.

History has been unkind to women, and that is proven fact. If attempts to rectify these historical attitudes somehow threathen you... Then your self esteem is really worthless.

'misogynist horde'
Also known as /b/
Seriously, check the quoted comments, boxxyizzqueen and all that shit.
>implying stuff
faggot being used as primary insult.

Yeah those guys were trolling, obvious as hell.

You know what? Just to annoy people I'm going to create the most sexist, racist, homophobic, misogynistic, and transphobic game ever. Then I'm going to say it is art. And if anyone tries to mess with it I'm going to call them a racist, victim shaming, sexist. Get at me.

conflictofinterests:

Trekkie:

first off, how do you record something that isn't reported? because don't you need to report something in order for someone to know its happened? or can you read minds now.

Mostly because rapists are known to be repeat offenders, and while it only takes one woman to come forward to put him into jail, he can get away with numerous rapes before that one woman comes forward. And while many women will tell SOMEONE else about what occurred, a good number of them can't find the courage to come to court with evidence, or when they do, the hesitation on their part reflects not a deep inner turmoil (to do with religious perceptions of purity, and American perceptions of self-sufficiency, and a questioning of whether there was anything more she could have done to stop it) to the judge and jury, but dishonesty. Your statement, that women can lie, reflects this blame-the-victim bias so common in rape cases.

It is odd to me, that someone can accuse someone of measurable physical abuse, and when the measurements are taken and it proves that no physical abuse has occurred, that person is labled a liar or a madperson, but when that physical abuse happens to be rape, and the supposed victim happens to be a woman, it is not just that person who is the liar or the madperson, but everyone of that gender as well. Why not everyone of that complexion, or haircolor, or eyecolor, or stature?

I said women can lie not that every woman is a liar if one of them dose. my problem with it is that everyone seems to assume that just because the person is female then they cant be capable of anything bad and whatever she says must be the truth. like how if a male teacher sleeps with one of his purples he, as he should, goes to prison. However if a female teacher (Sarah Jones in this case) sleeps with one of her purples then dose she go to prison... nope.... she gets set free and gets a playboy shoot instead. same crime vastly different consequences.

And another thing, the whole less than 10% of rapists never see prison thing..... wouldn't that be because the court didn't find enough evidence to be able to convict the suspect. Maybe some of those rape cases where false accusations? (and it happens quite a lot, http://falserapesociety.blogspot.co.uk/2010/06/orlando-false-rape-epidemic.html) maybe they got the wrong man ETC, what I find troubling is this assumption that if a man is accused then he must be guilty. why would someone lie?

also when someone step forward, for any crime, and says they did that to me.... 3 years ago, then we should take that with some salt because there will be minuscule to no evidence of that actually happening and frankly, if someone doesn't have evidence, why should i believe them? unless you have proof then you should not say that that crime was committed i don't care if its in court or stats it is not right to say something happened when you have little to no proof that it did. Frankly the whole 95% of rape isn't reported thing, doesn't hold water, because even a year or so down the line, you have no proof that it happened apart from what the alleged victim says and that isn't proof, that's an accusation.

and im sorry but asking for proof is NOT blaming the victim its trying to dercern the truth.

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 . . . 35 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