Flash Game Makes Players Beat Up "Tropes vs. Women" Creator

[Valis88]

2. There is nothing wrong with objectification in art and that includes video games. Art does not need to be chained to reality nor should anyone's standards aside from the developer should affect that creation of art for better or worse. There is no way to measure that "evening out".

So I'd assume that a game with constant sexual objectification of men is ok then? I mean no one would have an issue with that right?

You guys would be totally cool with a game that is wall to wall dudes in the buff, with chainguns?

If their is nothing wrong with it, then why isn't it happening now? Why don't we have man meat games eh?

 

[Chives on top of me]

heh...sexism and or "demeaning" depictions of women in video games are not all or nothing. Each depiction/action is judged on a case by case basis...like in the real world.

"why did snake leave Foxhound".....this is contrived... the writer contrived it...if it is well written then it will not seem "out of character". However well written or not this is still the writer making snake do something....back to the clothing issue the designer still puts the character in whatever outfit and their reasons for this action are subject to scrutiny ...how is this unclear?

Contrived... you don't seem to understand how that word is used in literary criticism. It does not mean "everything the writer writes".

con·trived/kənˈtrīvd/
Adjective:

Deliberately created rather than arising naturally or spontaneously.
Giving a sense of artificiality.

I am not offering a "literary criticism". I am opposing your opinion that a character placed in an outfit in a videogame can be equated to a woman in the real world deciding what to wear....

But what if the CHARACTER would naturally do that from what is established about the character and the world which itself is not contrived to suit a purpose. Then it would not be contrived.

Yes, every story might have to start with some unavoidable contrivance such as establishing Snake's anti-authoritarian ideals, but what naturally comes from that would be him leaving Foxhound.

You ARE offering literary criticism, you are criticising works that have been written, they had a script and written story by objecting to my criticism.

Realise if you say that everything a writer has any character do is contrived because the writer wrote it, then it doesn't matter what they write, they could never be criticised for being excessively contrived.

You CAN equate decisions fictional characters make to real world logic, like a real world woman applying logic to her tastes and prejudices.

This seems to have gone off the rails somewhat...

"But what if the CHARACTER would naturally do that from what is established about the character"
...yes and how is this first established? The writer writes it. The writer makes all the decisions. Just because the writer/designer has established reasons in their "world" for whatever action does not mean those actions cannot be scrutinized....

"You ARE offering literary criticism, you are criticizing works that have been written"

Really?
literary criticism
noun
1. a written evaluation of a work of literature [syn: criticism]
2. the informed analysis and evaluation of literature

I do not see how I was doing this......

"Realize if you say that everything a writer has any character do is contrived because the writer wrote it, then it doesn't matter what they write"
That is not what I've said at all. My position is that what matters (when judging what a character is doing) is what the writer has written.

"You CAN equate decisions fictional characters make to real world logic, like a real world woman applying logic to her tastes and prejudices
If a character is written to apply any logic to what they do then I guess..yes...

All of this is an aside to the original discussion "The writer/developer/designer is responsible (accountable) for the actions their creations take and for the clothes they are placed in." Objecting to how Lara Croft is depicted (clothing or body type) =/= telling a real world woman to coverup.

 

[clangunn]

Last post on this thread, I promise >.<

Have any of you guys ever stopped to ask a real woman gamer, how she feels about all of this?

Or is it simply ok to assume that you know how women feel, or how they should feel.

Just putting that out there....

I gotta say one thing about this.

How a person feels doesn't actually matter compared to the actual facts of a situation. Right now a good deal of people who either support or dissent this whole project are throwing out this "common wisdom" that the video game industry and the video game communities are "sexist". This in itself a logical fallacy because it is nothing more than one giant assumption without actually holding any specific company, or organization accountable to which one would then have to look at the people involved in that company or organization in terms of their leadership and representation.

Except the the assumption isn't that the video game industry is sexist... The point that many have tried to make in these threads is that Sarkeesian has attempted to point out that many of the societal norms that limit the bandwidth of prospective female representation to a few standardized recurring typologies (i.e. "tropes") also exist within the medium of video games. These tropes, by in large, play into standard narrative typologies which were commonly perceived to be more readily received by what has long been the larger majority of game consumers. Those being: a)primarily wealthy; b)possessing access to disposable income (their own or their parents; and b) primarily young. There's a significant number of weaknesses in this argument, but she isn't saying "You Tenmar. Your a ****ing sexist because you enjoy video games!" nor is she saying that "Cid Meier is a sexist because he is involved in the video games industry!"

She is pointing out that many of the standard sexist themes and narratives both in terms of story structure and character structure exist and are pervasive through the medium that we (the Escapist community) loves.

The big bugbear that this project has is that Anita brushes over the entire video game industry and has already jumped to the conclusion that these tropes are sexist.

Can you empirically state that these common narrative themes, many of which are the development of hundreds of years of literary tradition, aren't sexist? A number of those tropes she tries to map out have their roots in feudal European society. Are you going to tell me that by today's standards that Ophelia isn't a rather simplistic, one dimensional character that served as nothing more than a plot device to Hamlet's tragedy? Is the fact that she was defined by the frailties of her sex not sexist in today's context? Because the trope of hysteric women is very present throughout our culture today. In fact, look up the root of the word hysteria...

In terms of the scientific method that is not how you do research, her hypothesis is her conclusion. That is why you have some people saying they aren't really going to learn anything from the series. Another point is that she already makes the forgone conclusion from the harassment that the video game industry is sexist, yet it was an unorganized group of people who did the harassment that have no affiliation towards the video game industry that created the characters that she is calling sexist. There is a huge leap of logic she takes.

Funny thing about the investigation of human nature. It is not yet quantifiable purely through "scientific method". That is why the "social sciences" are an entirely different epistemological field from the "hard sciences." All social theory, including feminist theory falls into the social sciences. You can't empirically prove any theory is social research. It is merely a lens through which to attempt to decipher the world around you.

But the bigger question is that if Anita really thinks that the video game community and the video game industry is sexist? Then which ones? Which organizations and companies that are in clearly transparent and in leadership positions are sexist?

Do you want actual citable references wherein you will be provided in-depth and meaningful analysis? Stop watching 6 minute Youtube videos... Check out actual research. Here are some resources to start:

Beyond Barbie and Mortal Kombat: New Perspectives on Gender and Gaming (book, 2008) [http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1468058]

Maps of Digital Desires: Exploring the Topography of Gender and Play in Online Games (study, 2008) [http://www.nickyee.com/pubs/BBMK%20Yee.pdf]

Looking for Gender: Gender Roles and Behaviors Among Online Gamers, Journal of Communication [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01453.x/abstract?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false]

The true impact of the replication of classic gender themes is that they reinforce the larger societal forces at play. In short, the power of video games as the only true interactive medium is a means to normalize behaviors and beliefs that the larger society is trying to move away from.

So no, just asking a woman about their feelings actually isn't going to prove or disprove anything.

You, sir, are completely wrong. It is always worth asking members of the disenfranchised population as to how they perceive the that disenfranchisement. You have several examples on this thread and across this board of female gamers stating straight up that certain elements of some video games and the larger video game culture (as demonstrated on these threads) creates a barrier for their enjoyment of the medium. I could just as easily dismiss your opinion because you can't "prove or disprove anything" either.

 

[cobra_ky]

I just realized something. Can Nintendo sue Anita for copyright violation for her $50 pledge award?

That is clearly Nintendo's property, and she is clearly making money off of it.

Seems like a pretty clear-cut case of Fair Use to me. Also I'm not sure it would be a good PR move for the billion dollar company to sue an independent blogger who was just the target of a large-scale harassment campaign.

Except that she's selling them. The only way to obtain it, is to give her money. That's clearly not Fair Use.

And that's exactly the problem. Nintendo won't sue her, because it will make them look like the bad guys. The fact that she's been harrassed protects her by the PR it would give by sueing her, even though they're in their full right to do it.

Also, in what twisted world does ZELDA need help?

As Tenmar noted earlier, it's questionable whether or not these items are actually being sold. But setting that aside, commercial products aren't necessarily disqualified from fair use. There's plenty of unauthorized strategy guides and unlicensed T-shirts out there, after all. As for the other factors, Sarkeesian's use of the characters is clearly transformative, and intended as a criticism of the original work. Artwork of a single character is not an substantial amount of content from an entire series of video games, and Sarkeesian's stickers aren't going to impact the sales of Nintendo games overall.

It's not just that it's a bad PR move, I really don't think Nintendo would have a case, at all.

 

[clangunn]

I was wrong about not further responses:

So short post: How can we as a community claim that the roots of our culture are not steeped in misogynistic portrayals of privilege: gender, race, and class. When we have games like this:

Do you think this game was really being marketed to "adults"? Do you think it was being marketed to women? Or native americans? That is an overt example...

Here is another overt example - Aris Bakhtanians' recent public foot-in-mouth-then-shoved-up-his-ass moment [http://www.the-isb.com/?p=6772].

That being said, the fact that we are now (generally) addressing and lambasting these types of extreme examples demonstrates the ongoing growth of our community. However, this growth requires people to continuously raise uncomfortable issues. This is what the "controversy" around Tropes Vs. Women has done.

 

[LHZA]

snip

I'm almost certain women wear heels for their own enjoyment. I don't know any men who get anything out of whether a woman is in high heels or not but I can understand the appeal, it's like walking around on miniature stilts. Kinda fun. Impractical but fun.

I'm not coming down on heels in an office setting, for a night out, etc. Ask any female soldier if she wears heels in the heat of battle or would want to and I can't imagine any would say yes because of the whole lack of mobility therefore incresed likelihood of death thing. I could easily believe Ashley Williams likes to wear heels in certain circumstances, but why the hell is she wearing them in the middle of a battle? There's no point to it other than to make the character more sexually appealing and in that particular context it's out of place and therefore gratuitous. They're nto as bad as say Miranda Lawson's, but still.

If I may say and yes I am repeating this. Why do video games have to be chained to reality? Yeah we know women aren't going to be wearing high heels in actual combat situations. But what does that reality have to affect the game design choices made in a video game?

I mean I get it if say developers are marketing their game as "realistic" and then at random throw in the option of characters being shown wearing high heels. That is when you can criticize the game because it contradicts the selling point of the game.

But in a game like Gravity Rush and the character Kat? She controls gravity, considering she can make herself lighter in weight to prevent those hard landings I don't see how her wearing high heels becomes some sort of problem. And even if I take the logic out, a game where a character controls gravity is already clearly in the fantasy setting so there shouldn't be any criticism on the character because she wears high heels.

I've heard that argument for Gravity Rush from that detructoid article. Not familiar with that game so can't really comment, but if that's an accurate description of the game, than sure, okay, it's cool. Ashley has no such power to manipulate gravity. Heels on her just feel a little out of place on a battlefield because why? There doesn't feel to be a point to them other than to make her more sexually appealing, which in many other contexts would be fine, but why when she's fighting? Why when she's in a situation which is supposed to show off what a capable and highly skilled soldier she is must she still be sexualized like that, in such a way that would seriously hamper her ability to do her job. For me, and for many others because it's a common complaint, it ruins our suspension of disbelief just a little because it feel gratutious. Nothing wrong with a character being sexy, but does she always have to display her sexuality even in situations where it's vastly out of place?

And no, games don't have to be super realistic, but they still have to make sense even if it's involving their own made up set of rules. Gravity Rush sounds like it has come up with a way to justify having the character in heels and engaging in combat. Mass effect 2 and 3 never mentioned any technology that allowed for women to run/jump effectively in heels.

 

[Frankster]

Beyond Barbie and Mortal Kombat: New Perspectives on Gender and Gaming (book, 2008) [http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1468058]

Maps of Digital Desires: Exploring the Topography of Gender and Play in Online Games (study, 2008) [http://www.nickyee.com/pubs/BBMK%20Yee.pdf]

Looking for Gender: Gender Roles and Behaviors Among Online Gamers, Journal of Communication [http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01453.x/abstract?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false]
.

Cheers for the references and know you didn't post them in vain

 

[clangunn]

snip

Questions

1. Have you actually read the links you just provided as evidence?

2. Did the studies that I can't access being the first and the third actually state which companies and video game communities that intentionally use what Anita defines as "sexist" tropes are somehow sexist?

Cause I didn't see any sort of proof in the second link stated that somehow those groups were somehow sexist. But only that in 2008 when you look closer at the participation of women in relation to the MMO were not as active in playing compared to that of men. Although an interesting study to read as noted that while there is certainly the social aspect the content of the MMO does not hold the same appeal to women compared to men.

Strangely enough - of the three links I provided the 2nd is the only one that is readable in it's entirety. The first is a summary of a book. The second is a chapter from that same book. The third is an abstract about an academic article which provides an overview, context, and general findings of the study.

So, yes, I did read them to the extent possible. Though I will admit that I only skimmed through the actual chapter by Yee. Was it revelant? Yes - because it outlines the study of how game designers and players tend to believe there is some deep-rooted differentiation between the underlying desires male and female players have to play WoW or other socially engrossing MMOs.

Based on the survey the researcher(s) found that there weren't.

However, there are lovely little quotes from players such as the following:

"There are things that happen in-­game that make me embarrassed, as a woman and as a person who tries to be socially responsible, to be playing. For example, male players will talk about getting ?raped? without really thinking about it, things that happen will be referred to as ?gay,? which is offensive, people do crude things to player corpses in PvP [Player vs. Player settings], etc. (World of Warcraft, female, 29)"

or

When I played EQ, I was so sick and tired of being treated like a moron
or hit on 24?7 that I made a male character. The way people treat female chars and males in EQ was drastic, I had immediate respect. When on a female char, men think you don?t know how to play, cant be hardcore, and try to give you things to hit on you. Its annoying to say the least. (World of Warcraft, female, 35)

Which leads the researcher to posit that in WoW at least:

many female players have learned that it is danger­ous to reveal your real-­life gender in MMOs because they will be branded as incompetent and constantly propositioned; In other words, they must either accept the male-­subject position silently, or risk constant discrimination and harassment if they reveal that they are female.

This leads to believe you either did not actually read the piece you claimed to or your reading skills are rather limited.

3. How exactly are women disenfranchised? They aren't some minority, nor is there a legal standing that prevents any woman to become a computer programmer, artist, analyst, or even a lawyer and pursue a career in the video game industry. The barrier to work in the video game industry is the same for women as it is the same for men. It takes having a healthy work portfolio, a bit of experience, and a bit of luck having the right connections to network yourself as a potential valuable member to the team.

But what is stopping developers both men and women from making the content that women would like to have in video games? I don't think there is anything aside from if you can convert that want into an actual game mechanic.

disenfranchisedpast participle, past tense of dis·en·fran·chise (Verb)
Verb:
Deprive (someone) of the right to vote.
Deprived of power; marginalized.

Disenfranchisement can occur formally or informally. The fact that female players do not feel comfortable playing in a method that represents themselves through their avatar is a form of marginalization. It's funny we use the term avatar so loosely in gaming, because its roots are the literal manifestation of an entity into another world. An avatar isn't merely a means to which to interact with that world - it is the very embodiment of that person in that world.

The fact that female players feel uncomfortable trying to get other players to stop using terms like "rape" in a casual, pejorative sense in the context of beating and/or victimizing another player is depriving them of social power.

As for the culture, what is stopping men and women from creating new communities if they feel like some clan or guild is some barrier. Hell I've moved from guild to guild during my time playing World of Warcraft(Vanilla) and one of our guild leaders was a woman and she was our main tank. In other words, if she wasn't there, there was no raid. It's not like the internet has limited capacity to make new sites and meet new people and create new cultures.

What's particularly sad about the fact that you are posting this perspective on the Escapist Forums is that a there were probably a number of female community members who joined specifically because it is (generally) a site for thoughtful discourse on video games and video game culture. The sheer vitriol that some have expressed in response to Tropes Vs. Women may well have ruined that sense of community for some of them. In fact, the fact that you claim it is never worth taking the time to ask them how they feel may have furthered that.

I keep repeating over and over that you have female gamer's posting about their personal experiences as the recipients of these societal forces and yet you retort back with how all women wear high-heels because it makes them taller and feel good.

Stay classy

 

[Orinon]

The worst thing about this is that I'm not at all surprised.

Yeah the sad part is some people might not even care.

That's it, I am making it my personal mission to wipe out the entire fucking Hominid family.

Would you minnd If I assisted? or at least suggest only remove the dumb ones
I try not to post when I'm angry one Time I believe I did during the controversy of bullet storm and I realized I was being an ass. I don't know about sexism because as I think Movie Bobn said things might not look biased but they can be.

 

[LHZA]

I've heard that argument for Gravity Rush from that detructoid article. Not familiar with that game so can't really comment, but if that's an accurate description of the game, than sure, okay, it's cool. Ashley has no such power to manipulate gravity. Heels on her just feel a little out of place on a battlefield because why? There doesn't feel to be a point to them other than to make her more sexually appealing, which in many other contexts would be fine, but why when she's fighting? Why when she's in a situation which is supposed to show off what a capable and highly skilled soldier she is must she still be sexualized like that, in such a way that would seriously hamper her ability to do her job. For me, and for many others because it's a common complaint, it ruins our suspension of disbelief just a little because it feel gratutious. Nothing wrong with a character being sexy, but does she always have to display her sexuality even in situations where it's vastly out of place?

And no, games don't have to be super realistic, but they still have to make sense even if it's involving their own made up set of rules. Gravity Rush sounds like it has come up with a way to justify having the character in heels and engaging in combat. Mass effect 2 and 3 never mentioned any technology that allowed for women to run/jump effectively in heels.

Question: Why are we applying reality to a Sci-fi game? Note: I did not play much of the Mass Effect series. I played the starting area of Mass Effect 1 and hated it, clunky UI to use abilities and shooting just never made sense to me.

A game where you have alien lifeforms, the ability to have sexual relations that disregard all anatomy, and the like?

I just find it odd that somehow reality must be applied to everything now.

EDIT: I mean imagine if reality was applied to "the scream".

As I've said, I don't expect everything to be uber realistic, but games do have to work within the rules they make for themselves. In short everything in a game still has to have a certain amount of plausibility, however slight. The example you gave about Gravity Rush, that game seems to have a plausible explaination for how the main character (is she? as I said, don't know the game) performs acrobatic acts while dressed in heels, but they do not do so in Mass Effect 3 (or 2 for that matter). Their is nothing that dissaudes us from assuming running in heels isn't as cumbersome as it is in real life (I nearly broke my foot just walking in those things). I personally would also prefer that at least during battle scenes, where a character like Ashely has come prepared to fight, she not be in heels. It is a small, but in my mind effective way of not over sexualizing a character (not that a little sex isn't a good thing, but time and place people). Fighting in heels is not plausable.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

Of course, the great irony here is that the vicious response is not only giving Sarkeesian's cause way more publicity than it would have otherwise gotten, but does more to illustrate the problem of misogyny in nerd/gamer culture way more than a video series ever could.

Because seriously, making a videogame about beating a woman in the face for daring to express the point of view that a male-dominated industry doesn't always treat women and female characters like it should, is kind of just making her point for her.

Said it better than I could.

Seriously, why the hell are people so pissed about her making a video series showing that women aren't portrayed in the best light in games?

The dumb thing is that they don't even have to watch it. It's not like she's using the extra $154000 to force every person on the internet to watch her video.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

I could care less either way, but why censor the flash creator? Shes thrusted herself into the public eye so shes fair game to whatever people want to do or say or create about her.

It hasn't been "censored", it's just been voted to be a shit game, and due to NG's rules, it get's removed.