A response to some arguments in anita sarkeesians interview.

[Dryk]

Similarly, to relate to Ms. Sarkeesian's efforts - it is not enough to simply stop discussing gender, and to pretend the issue doesn't exist. Whether or not she makes mountains of molehills, or focuses on minutia instead of the larger scope, she is trying to discuss ways in which women are represented - and misrepresented. Whether you agree with her or not, the conversation she is trying to have is an important one, because we are not yet even remotely close to having a society where we don't have to worry about gender - where this issue is no longer important enough to talk about.

Feminism is going to make progress in spite of her, not because of her. She's way out of her depth and she's going to do more harm than good.

Also she has in the past encouraged her viewers to not educate themselves about the content she's talking about, because it's just too sexist and they shouldn't be subject to it. Telling people to believe your interpretation of what you're talking about and encouraging them to not go out and see for themselves is completely unacceptable.

 

[Kahunaburger]

Clear contradictions aren't substantive? Ha ha. Ha ha ha ha ha. We're done here.

None of the annotations I saw constituted a substantive response. It was basically all lore QQing. If there's one that actually substantively addresses sexism in Bayonetta in a way that would not cause an average viewer to go "ahaha no," please feel free to present it.

There's a difference between "Lore QQing" and complaining that "Return of the Jedi sucks because the Daleks swooped in at the end and wiped out the rebellion." "this analysis of moral simplicity in Star Wars is flawed because it says Luke is 22 when he's actually 23, and because it says Palpatine is a simple villain when I think he's a complex villain T.T"

Fixed for greater accuracy. Seriously, if these annotations are supposed to make a case about substantive issues, whoever put this video up should re-work them. From an outside perspective it looks like someone making a rational argument about sexism in a video game, and someone else whining about irrelevant backstory details that nobody cares about.

 

[targren]

Fixed for greater accuracy. Seriously, if these annotations are supposed to make a case about substantive issues, whoever put this video up should re-work them. From an outside perspective it looks like someone making a rational argument about sexism in a video game, and someone else whining about irrelevant backstory details that nobody cares about.

Except you didn't fix anything. That whole "single mother" garbage that missed who the kid was ignored probably the biggest plot-fulcrum in the goddamn game, and not calling it out as Did Not Do the Research [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DidNotDoTheResearch] doesn't help anyone except the pseudo-political hack and her echo chamber.

 

[Kahunaburger]

Fixed for greater accuracy. Seriously, if these annotations are supposed to make a case about substantive issues, whoever put this video up should re-work them. From an outside perspective it looks like someone making a rational argument about sexism in a video game, and someone else whining about irrelevant backstory details that nobody cares about.

Except you didn't fix anything. That whole "single mother" garbage that missed who the kid was ignored probably the biggest plot-fulcrum in the goddamn game, and not calling it out as Did Not Do the Research [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DidNotDoTheResearch] doesn't help anyone except the pseudo-political hack and her echo chamber.

Yeah, as I said, irrelevant lore nitpicks (or in this case, irrelevant semantics) re: a game where the lore is an afterthought. The video's not about Bayonetta's "plot," it's about sexism/creepyness in the game's advertising. From an outsider's perspective, the video is much more persuasive than the annotations because it actually has something interesting to say.

 

[targren]

Yeah, as I said, irrelevant lore nitpicks (or in this case, irrelevant semantics) re: a game where the lore is an afterthought.

Whatever you say, chief. You can handwave it away all you want, it doesn't change the fact that she had no clue what she was even bitching about.

 

[Kahunaburger]

Whatever you say, chief. You can handwave it away all you want, it doesn't change the fact that she had no clue what she was even bitching about.

bitching

Dohohohoho

Way to establish credibility on this subject.

Bottom line is that the lore nitpickiness is irrelevant to both most people watching the video and likely even most people who played Bayonetta, because it's not exactly the sort of game people play for the lore. The issue he should have been addressing was the sexism allegation. I think a good response can be made re: Bayonetta and sexism, but this definitely isn't it. I'd leave the job to someone like Susan Arendt.

Like, I personally think it was designed from the ground up as wank material for neckbeards, but Bayonetta's sexism or lack thereof actually is an issue where IMO reasonable people can disagree.

 

[targren]

Bottom line is that the lore nitpickiness is irrelevant to both most people watching the video and likely even most people who played Bayonetta, because it's not exactly the sort of game people play for the lore.

You're the one conflating "lore" with "plot." Contrary to your oh-so-informed opinion, the game had a simple and fun story, and not a whole lot of "wank material." So my original metaphor, which you so cleverly[footnote]Protip: I'm using the word ironically, in case that escapes you too[/footnote] "fixed" was spot on, a point which you either continue to miss, or intentionally ignore.

 

[him over there]

Whatever you say, chief. You can handwave it away all you want, it doesn't change the fact that she had no clue what she was even bitching about.

bitching

Dohohohoho

Way to establish credibility on this subject.

Bottom line is that the lore nitpickiness is irrelevant to both most people watching the video and likely even most people who played Bayonetta, because it's not exactly the sort of game people play for the lore. The issue he should have been addressing was the sexism allegation. I think a good response can be made re: Bayonetta and sexism, but this definitely isn't it. I'd leave the job to someone like Susan Arendt.

Like, I personally think it was designed from the ground up as wank material for neckbeards, but Bayonetta's sexism or lack thereof actually is an issue where IMO reasonable people can disagree.

The thing with Bayonetta though is a lot like Lollipop chainsaw. The thing about it is even though the main character is down right fetishised they're still treated like more than tits and ass within the source material. The whole "Irony" thing is that the seemingly obvious wank fodder is better personified and characterized then most non satirical females in the medium.

As for messing up on lore? Yeah that doesn't matter. getting a few details incorrect is irrelevant when they have no bearing on the subject matter being discussed and when they do you have to keep in mind that the lore doesn't justify sexism because the lore is in the designer's complete control. Though there is the small caveat that since she gets parts of the game wrong she may not have experienced or gave it a fair play but Bayonetta is pretty needlessly labyrinthine anyway.

 

[Kahunaburger]

Bottom line is that the lore nitpickiness is irrelevant to both most people watching the video and likely even most people who played Bayonetta, because it's not exactly the sort of game people play for the lore.

You're the one conflating "lore" with "plot." Contrary to your oh-so-informed opinion, the game had a simple and fun story, and not a whole lot of "wank material." So my original metaphor, which you so cleverly "fixed" was spot on, a point which you either continue to miss, or intentionally ignore.

Okay, so this guy's whining is relevant to part of the video's intro segment for the tiny proportion of the video who have:

A) played Bayonetta.
B) played Bayonetta for the plot.

What it isn't relevant to is the core point of the video re: sexism in advertising. This is essentially half of why the FF detractors have thus far failed to persuade people - anything that comes close to a rational argument generally fails to address the core issues re: sexism and representation, and instead focuses on lore minutia, conspiracy theories, and the like. The other half is that they can't hold their sexism/MRAing in long enough to post something.

 

[Jdb]

As for messing up on lore? Yeah that doesn't matter. getting a few details incorrect is irrelevant when they have no bearing on the subject matter being discussed and when they do you have to keep in mind that the lore doesn't justify sexism because the lore is in the designer's complete control. Though there is the small caveat that since she gets parts of the game wrong she may not have experienced or gave it a fair play but Bayonetta is pretty needlessly labyrinthine anyway.

It does matter when the facts are spun wrong to support a view.

"First the positive things about the game. She's a single mother. And, ummm... That's kind of it. So onto the negatives." The negatives conclude Bayonetta is "basically a choose your own patriarchal adventure porno fantasy." This conclusion is then used to suggest Bayonetta is responsible for encouraging sexual harassment in Japanese subway stations.

 

[targren]

Okay, so this guy's whining is relevant to part of the video's intro segment for the tiny proportion of the video who have:

A) played Bayonetta.
B) played Bayonetta for the plot.

C) Mistakenly believe that she's being honest instead of, as the above poster put it, using the false claims to spin her negative view.

 

[runic knight]

My biggest reservation about these videos is that I am not sure that she fully grasps video games as a media and is therefore likely to miss the important elements of female portrayal in them by looking at them only through a feminist lens. The article the OP posted has some good examples of what I am worried about in pointing out that supporting female characters (like Sforza, like Lucy, etc.) aren't being fully understood in their context as supporting characters before being examined as female characters. The supporting characters - male or female - are generally never given as much attention as the protagonist group or the player-character. That is something that must be accounted for before discussing how they are being portrayed in a gender specific way. This comes up in the Bastion example - he's right saying the game is minimalist and therefore it is not even-handed to point out that Zia isn't given a fully fleshed description and position in the game and say that is because she is female - it's because she isn't the player-character first and foremost.

There is a fruitful discussion to be had about why there aren't as many female (and I mean female-only choice, not dual choice gender like Shepard or Hawke or the Warden or the Fallout protagonists) player-characters as male player-characters. There is a discussion to be had about the consistency with which female support characters assume roles of healers, tactical support, or other semi-passive forms of assistance to the protagonist at greater frequency than male support characters who tend to play more aggressive and active support roles. There are plenty of things that can be discussed about gender in video games that would be fruitful for the industry as well as the community to examine, understand, and possibly grow from.

What I have seen so far though has been somewhat indicating that those are not going to be the major centers of discussion for her videos and that instead there is going to be a tally of what female characters are doing in comparison to male characters without accounting for the hierarchy of characters in general in games and without considering how the narratives of different types of games unfolds. RPGs treat characters very differently than an RTS game or a plat former does - is this going to be accounted for? I am not seeing that as yet, and that is disappointing.

What it comes down to for me is that - if someone doesn't take the whole picture into account and doesn't take the time to understand the dynamic of the media and how it functions into account, then they can't assess and accurate picture of what the inadequacies of the assignment of genders to roles within that system is - and what will result is something that won't have much value to the community or the industry, but will instead merely stir up confusion and controversy in an unproductive way.

Thank you for putting to words the biggest complaint I have had with her and the videos she makes and claims she puts forth. It isn't that she is trying to talk about females in games, it is how she is missing the point of things 90% of the time. A lot of the issues she points to are problems of stories told in the games themselves. It isn't that females in some games are not fleshed out as well as males, it is more often because of their roles in the story. You don't find out as much about the comic relief or the supportive family or even the love interest as you do the protagonist for a reason, it is the protagonist's story. Yet she suggests it can be sexist for that if they are women. In reality it is a problem with the core of games themselves and how they tell stories. Sometimes, people tell lazy stories and use cliches and paint by number plots, tropes and characters. But as discussed, this is not so much a sexist attribute to women as often just a laziness in storytelling.
Also, she seems to have a hard time understanding how to judge representatives of a group apart from the group as a whole. But that is a complaint of a different matter I guess.

 

[him over there]

As for messing up on lore? Yeah that doesn't matter. getting a few details incorrect is irrelevant when they have no bearing on the subject matter being discussed and when they do you have to keep in mind that the lore doesn't justify sexism because the lore is in the designer's complete control. Though there is the small caveat that since she gets parts of the game wrong she may not have experienced or gave it a fair play but Bayonetta is pretty needlessly labyrinthine anyway.

It does matter when you spin the facts wrong to support a view.

"She's a single mother. And, ummm... That's kind of it. So onto the negatives." The negatives concluding Bayonetta is "basically a choose your own patriarchal adventure porno fantasy."

Oh well that's different. When you said lore I thought you meant the sort of bullshit like "anime girl 12 can only use her powers when her clothes are off. She has to do it so it isn't wrong you guys!" Skipping nearly all the details of a character's personification in order to focus on the negative and disregard the counter points is pretty intellectually dishonest. Especially in the case of Bayonetta. Like I said Bayonetta is ironic because a sexually charged and fetishistic character is actually better characterized and treated like an actual person than the majority of the females in the medium who are portrayed as a sexual object. Skipping the human element and only concentrating on the sex defeats the entire point of Bayonetta's design.

 

[runic knight]

Yeah, as I said, irrelevant lore nitpicks (or in this case, irrelevant semantics) re: a game where the lore is an afterthought. The video's not about Bayonetta's "plot," it's about sexism/creepyness in the game's advertising. From an outsider's perspective, the video is much more persuasive than the annotations because it actually has something interesting to say.

Wait...how is lore not important? Being the characters are fiction, the lore explains behaviors and lets up the world they live in. Having aspects behind it that explain character conditions does seem important if you are going to explain tropes about the character and their relevance in relation to sexism.
For an example of the point I would like to add to this discussion, is a book written about characters in a world where one race is treated inferior then another inherently racist? If they use stereotypes with negative connotations to better exemplify the sort of world? Is a game where the main character is fetishistic necessarily mean it is sexist? Is it if the character has depth and reasons for the personality?
If you are talking about how the game is marketed, well, video games have had an ugly history there in many directions. Anyone remember the playstation squirrels? Not sure if this is more publishers or marketing failing, but it seems less about the game itself and more about treating the potential audience as though they are stupid. It seems less sexist and more just raw stupidity. Though if what they are marketing is representative of the character in the game itself (fetishistic and what not), is it still? That would then be pointed back to content of the game right? I don't know, it is pretty late here tonight.

 

[Jdb]

you are both kind of right.

not well researched, missing the point of the video (sexist advertising of game)

Bayonetta's advertising encourages men to grope women in Japanese subway stations is the point of the video. The suggestion is absurd and is equivalent to "video games encourage violent behavior."

On a more humorous note, I want to mention this quote in the video.

"Women's bodies are constantly used to sell products, including video games."

And men's bodies aren't? I mean, I was instantly sold on Street Fighter 3 and 4 because of Dudley.

Spoiler

You're darn right I bought those games because of they way he looks.

 

[Kahunaburger]

Yeah, as I said, irrelevant lore nitpicks (or in this case, irrelevant semantics) re: a game where the lore is an afterthought. The video's not about Bayonetta's "plot," it's about sexism/creepyness in the game's advertising. From an outsider's perspective, the video is much more persuasive than the annotations because it actually has something interesting to say.

Wait...how is lore not important? Being the characters are fiction, the lore explains behaviors and lets up the world they live in. Having aspects behind it that explain character conditions does seem important if you are going to explain tropes about the character and their relevance in relation to sexism.

But if you're making a video about advertising, it's part of the "hey guise a game exists where you play a naked chick with guns for shoes it's called Bayonetta" at the beginning. I.e., pretty tangential. And if you're refuting a video about advertising, focusing 90% of your refutation on something that is extremely loosely related to the video's substantive content is not a wise move.

For an example of the point I would like to add to this discussion, is a book written about characters in a world where one race is treated inferior then another inherently racist? If they use stereotypes with negative connotations to better exemplify the sort of world? Is a game where the main character is fetishistic necessarily mean it is sexist? Is it if the character has depth and reasons for the personality?

Bayonetta's a case where I think reasonable people can and do disagree. IIRC Susan Arendt discussed Bayonetta as a positive example on the Other M panel, and I would be very interested to see her response to this video, for instance. There's definitely an interesting discussion to be had about this game, I just don't think that this video is part of that discussion.

 

[Kahunaburger]

huehuehue double post