Here we go again: Anita Sarkeesian and the gaming community

[Pr0]

Could someone just delete this thread, I'm tired of watching the Escapist be used as a place to simply put more logs on the fire of the whole "GG is about MISOGYNY" psy-op.

Everyone knows that GamerGate was about games media corruption...it just got heavily drowned out by an engineered drama bomb that completely obfuscated its entire point.

Freaking drama queens on all sides in my opinion.

 

[Buckets]

Mirror's edge was shite and gave me motion sickness so doubt I'd even bother with more of the same.

 

[Josh123914]

Snip

More Snipping

Citizen Snips

I can't believe it's not Snips

Type "snip" five times, it loses meaning

*Frantically waves arms*

You're reading waaaaay too much into this.
If AS really is a consultant then you're bickering is exactly what EA wants.

Remember when EA won the Golden Poo two consecutive years?
And EA attributed it to people brigading the poll because they were angry at the year's Madden cover? And how there were gay romance options in ME3?
They were bullshitting, but were covering their asses using the idea of them being progressive as a shield for criticism of their anti-consumer practices and *shudder* that ME3 Ending.

Having AS as a consultant is a calculated PR move by their PR team.

If the game is good? Great! Points to EA for being progressive.

If the game is buggy or sucks? Well then, EA can just say those who hate the game are just hating it because AS was involved, and probably hate the game because a woman's the protagonist.

It isn't some conspiracy, it's EA deciding that having AS on board will give them a nice safety net somewhere down the line.
And having everyone bicker about her involvement is what they're probably after, so they can point to threads like this a year down the line as proof of people's prejudice.

And as for whether or not AS will affect the game?
She's just one consultant. A consultant for a sequel no less.
If she objects to something in the game, but the developer reeeaaaally wants it, then its being included in the game.

 

[Silence]

I'd like to see what she sees as a powerful female character, because of yet I only heard her complaining. So, it's completely fine.

But I will be making fun if I can fit her character in her own criticised stereotyped, and I don't see her avoiding that.

edit: Mirror's Edge story was by far the worst aspect of the game (I love the game btw). I think Anita could avoid the stereotype if she does the same as the first game: Avoid any complex characteristics altogether.

And edit2: So it is not even a fact that she helps with the game, but a speculation? Stop being such conspiracy theorists, pls. Wow.

 

[Vault101]

Everyone knows that GamerGate was about games media corruption...it just got heavily drowned out by an engineered drama bomb that completely obfuscated its entire point.

uhh...no everybody "doesn't" know that

what people think GG is depends entirely on who you ask

 

[FirstNameLastName]

Please people, read the thread before posting, at very least read the original post. I know I'm being part of the problem here by adding to the post count, but it has already been discovered that this is a great load of bullshit.

No reason to be outraged over it.
No reason to be pleased over it.
No reason to be apathetic over it, as there is nothing to be apathetic about.

 

[Haerthan]

Before we get to everyone brandishing their torches and pitchforks, I'd just like to point out that the last instance of a high-profile developer listening to Sarkeesian's criticism/views was Saints Row IV [https://www.google.com/search?q=saints+row+iv+anita+sarkeesian&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a&channel=np&source=hp], and anybody who has played that game knows how it turned out.

Worth noting that the video the developer agreed with was uploaded after Saint's Row 4 was released.

When even the freaking New York Times, a HUGE mainstream paper showed that GG was founded on nothing but misogyny

Which is an outright lie. I've been following GamerGate since the beginning and it has, at its core, nothing to do with misogyny. It was founded on the back of allegations that were made about corruption in the industry. Have people used it as an excuse to be misogynistic? Yes, but the acts of a minority don't represent the majority. If it did than you could easily say that Anita and her followers are just misandrists.

OT: meh. Even if it was true I doubt it would have been anything more than a pr stunt.

I am not even going to dignify that with a response, beyond what I just wrote and will write. Keep yourself blind to the whole thing, I don't care. Keep calling everyone a liar, when the writing is on the wall.

 

[shrekfan246]

Please people, read the thread before posting, at very least read the original post. I know I'm being part of the problem here by adding to the post count, but it has already been discovered that this is a great load of bullshit.

No reason to be outraged over it.
No reason to be pleased over it.
No reason to be apathetic over it, as there is nothing to be apathetic about.

Mate, it's a thread about Anita Sarkeesian on the internet.

You can't expect people to bother with pesky things like "fact-checking" or "reading the OP" before they start typing away.

Before we get to everyone brandishing their torches and pitchforks, I'd just like to point out that the last instance of a high-profile developer listening to Sarkeesian's criticism/views was Saints Row IV [https://www.google.com/search?q=saints+row+iv+anita+sarkeesian&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a&channel=np&source=hp], and anybody who has played that game knows how it turned out.

Worth noting that the video the developer agreed with was uploaded after Saint's Row 4 was released.

Since this has been brought up a few times now, I'll say that I fail to see how it's particularly relevant given that we live in a time where games can be and are heavily modified even long after their initial release.

Also, from what I understand (though I'll admit to not watching Sarkeesian's videos so maybe I'm wrong) Saints Row IV was mentioned as an example of a game franchise getting better in its representation as it goes on, which still flies directly in the face of what everyone seems to think Sarkeesian wants. Saints Row IV was still just as baudy and off-the-wall and filled with sexual stuff as any other GTA-style game, and that didn't change after Sarkeesian put her attention on it and the developer decided to respond.

 

[Andy Shandy]

I have a feeling that this topic might be taking a little holiday to R&P sometime soon.

How do you guys stay so angry over such a long period of time? Seriously she's just one person. She's not going to destroy gaming as we know it. That's my job ridiculous!

Are we going to get updates about what she's doing forever? I wonder when we'll think `hey maybe that's enough`?
I mean, we all know the reason she's so famous is the people who will not shut up about how they wish she'd go away.

The best part is that it's not even true! People are getting outraged over something The Kodu - who I see is in the thread to spout some more nonsense - made up two years ago.

 

[zinho73]

I don't blame people for being unhappy about this. If they disagree with Sarkeesians' views, and also are fans of the Mirror's Edge franchise, it's understandable that they would not want those two things to combine.

Not expecting much to actually come of it, but I can empathise.

Because I'm fucking human.

To me the problem is not her view, it is her logic and arguments, which is somewhat more serious. She mixes some obvious stuff: "videogames have female stereotypes" with some very crazy assumptions :"the more you think you are not affected by media, the more you are affected".

Using her as a consultant is obviously a marketing stunt. They know she is polemic and that some people like her to the point of giving her money to state the obvious mixed with nonsense.

I doubt the developers will really listen to her or that she will contribute to anything of value, but, as we can see by this thread it will give the game some more internet hits. If they do listen to her, the game will probably not be very good. In her videos she removes everything out of context when giving examples, proving that she really does not understand a thing about games or is just content to mislead people.

Of note: I think feminism is important and yes, of course women is underrepresented in videogames. From this basic truth, Anita's conclusions are a disservice for feminism and for the videogame industry.

Edit: if the fact were true obviously.

 

[Something Amyss]

You're reading waaaaay too much into this.
If AS really is a consultant then you're bickering is exactly what EA wants.

You say that, but you're ignoring the part where I (possibly the others, too) already accept that she isn't. So I'm "bickering" is irrelevant to EA.

It isn't some conspiracy, it's EA deciding that having AS on board will give them a nice safety net somewhere down the line.

It is a conspiracy, and it's the pot calling the kettle black when you factor in you said others were reading too much into this. It's also not happening, so EA clearly isn't doing this for any reason, let alone your stated reasons.

But seriously, bad form on "you're reading too much into this" followed by an EA conspiracy theory about their master plan.

I stopped taking the majority of her critics at their word a long time ago because the majority of the criticism leveled at her is either false or results from a basic lack of understanding of the english language. I saw more so many people either lie or misconstruct her statements to derive a meaning that was never part of anything she said that it stopped being funny or infuriating, I just get tired about it.

Before anyone fukken jumps my throat: There is valid criticism of her work. But not all criticism is equal. Stating that she is a 'con artist' by using some major leaps to connect something over half a decade ago to what she does now, fabricating statements she never said (like in the petition or plenty of threads in this forum alone) is not valid criticism. Misrepresenting her argument that results from a lack of understanding of what she said is not valid criticism (hi Thunderb00t).

Yeah, I'm on board with all of that. Well, except the Thunderf00t part. He has a penis, and thus what he says about games is instantly more valid. But I accidentally scrolled below your post and we immediately get into exactly what you're talking about.

All the "tropes" or rather things that Anita lambasts in her videos.. like female strippers, violence against women etc etc. Is still present in Saints Row IV

That, for example.

Everyone knows that GamerGate was about games media corruption...it just got heavily drowned out by an engineered drama bomb that completely obfuscated its entire point.

In the same sense "Everyone knows" Saddam Hussein was behind 9-11, or Christopher Columbus was trying to prove the earth was round, or bumblebees in flight violate the laws of aerodynamics, or....

The best part is that it's not even true! People are getting outraged over something The Kodu - who I see is in the thread to spout some more nonsense - made up two years ago.

Seriously? People are filing petitions over something made up here on the Escapist?

 

[ryukage_sama]

It's just one game that already had a female protagonist with a focus on a sibling relationship. It's already the kind of game Sarkeesian would approve of in terms of themes and portrayal of women. If the polish the game mechanics, I'd look forward to the sequel.

Marketing wise, I'm not sure a AAA game would receive a net positive bump in terms of publicity that would translate to purchases. Indie games have little to lose by emphasizing atypical protagonists, but Mirror's Edge needs to move many more copies. The original failed to meet sales expectations, and many gamers would rather the debate over women in games occur behind the scenes and not on their screen while playing games.

 

[Worgen]

What are these radical views? If you would enlighten me.

Im not really at my pc right now, but for example that there's no such thing as sexism against men. She's allowed to believe so, but i find it radical, and i don't believe one can have this view and also be for equality.

I don't recall her saying that in any of her vids. Do you have proof she actually said it?

 

[Worgen]

What are these radical views? If you would enlighten me.

Im not really at my pc right now, but for example that there's no such thing as sexism against men. She's allowed to believe so, but i find it radical, and i don't believe one can have this view and also be for equality.

I don't recall her saying that in any of her vids. Do you have proof she actually said it?

She didn't say it in her videos, she said it on her twitter account.

https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/533445611543363585

[tweet t=http://twitter.com/femfreq/status/533445611543363585]

Hmm, that's pretty stupid.

 

[EternallyBored]

What are these radical views? If you would enlighten me.

Im not really at my pc right now, but for example that there's no such thing as sexism against men. She's allowed to believe so, but i find it radical, and i don't believe one can have this view and also be for equality.

I don't recall her saying that in any of her vids. Do you have proof she actually said it?

She didn't say it in her videos, she said it on her twitter account.

https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/533445611543363585

[tweet t=http://twitter.com/femfreq/status/533445611543363585]

It is a line of logic I disagree with, but it is worth pointing out that this line of thought doesn't actually state that men cannot be discriminated against or that people can't be prejudiced towards them. When someone spouts this line they are using sexism as a way to differentiate "random person or group being a prejudiced dick towards a certain group" and "historically possessing a preponderance of the power and prestige in society to the point that decisions and systems generally benefit one group over the other".

It's a useful distinction in academic writing as readers at that level (Which would include Anita with her graduate degree) can distinguish that the -ism is being applied on the macro level in order to differentiate it's use from the micro or mezzo level where it is considered less useful for sociological study purposes.

Where this line of logic tends to fall apart is that the layman definition of racism and sexism has included micro and mezzo level interactions for so long that trying to push a largely academic distinction on the public at large serves little purpose other than to create unnecessary misunderstanding and friction. That, and people using it to actually try and devalue issues and concerns of the majority power group tend to muck the whole thing up by using it in a wholly immature and taunting manner.

Still a dumb thing to post on Twitter in my opinion.

 

[rcs619]

What are these radical views? If you would enlighten me.

Im not really at my pc right now, but for example that there's no such thing as sexism against men. She's allowed to believe so, but i find it radical, and i don't believe one can have this view and also be for equality.

I don't recall her saying that in any of her vids. Do you have proof she actually said it?

She didn't say it in her videos, she said it on her twitter account.

https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/533445611543363585

[tweet t=http://twitter.com/femfreq/status/533445611543363585]

Hmm, that's pretty stupid.

To be fair, I think it's more a case of her being terrible at expressing what she's trying to say (and also the limited character limit on twitter. Maybe twitter isn't the best place to discuss weighty social issues?).

I don't think that she's saying there isn't prejudice against men. There's plenty of prejudice, depending on your race, creed, social standing, etc etc. But sexism just isn't something that the vast majority of men ever have to deal with. You just don't see men get discriminated against for being men, it's almost always because of other factors involved. Women, however, do have to deal with sexism as well as the usual sorts of prejudices. There *are* people out there who hold crazy beliefs regarding women, that they're irrational, or 'different' than men, or should adhere to their own preconceived social norms regarding gender roles... on top of prejudices based on race, religion, social class, appearance, etc. Outside of unusual circumstances, you just don't see a lot of sexism directed against men for being men. It happens, and I think her definition of sexism is far too narrow, but the vast majority of the time, it is a distinctly female issue.

On topic though, I just find it kind of funny how big Anita Sarkeesian has become, and how much it infuriates some people, and how this is all 100% to blame on those same people in the first place. Sarkeesian is a monster of her detractors' own design. The only reason she has become such a huge, outspoken, well-known name inside and outside of gaming circles is because of the insane backlash and harassment. If everyone would have acted like normal, reasonable people, she'd have just posted some videos, we might have had an interesting discussion about how women are represented within gaming, and them moved on. It's just kind of funny watching every attempt to strike her down just making her stronger.

 

[Josh123914]

You're reading waaaaay too much into this.
If AS really is a consultant then you're bickering is exactly what EA wants.

You say that, but you're ignoring the part where I (possibly the others, too) already accept that she isn't. So I'm "bickering" is irrelevant to EA.

It isn't some conspiracy, it's EA deciding that having AS on board will give them a nice safety net somewhere down the line.

It is a conspiracy, and it's the pot calling the kettle black when you factor in you said others were reading too much into this. It's also not happening, so EA clearly isn't doing this for any reason, let alone your stated reasons.

But seriously, bad form on "you're reading too much into this" followed by an EA conspiracy theory about their master plan.

I quoted you along with a half dozen others who've been quite vocal in this thread.

And (Oh God) I'm gonna try and avoid getting bogged down in minutia, but a company making some sort of calculated risk with high profile people they take on for projects is not a conspiracy.
It's making an assumption based on the actions of EA in the past.

I get that you probably read my post as "You're theories are all crazy, now listen to my theory!"
And from certain angles that may be true, but you and others arguing is only creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.

And, well, considering AS isn't even working with them, at this point I'm just pontificating.