I do not understand.

[f1r2a3n4k5]

I don't know. I think she provides many interesting talking points.

When you make a logical argument, often times you can't incontrovertibly prove or disprove something. Instead, you need to provide evidence. She's tackling a LARGE issue, so obviously there's a lot to cover. But I think she satisfactorily demonstrated that the "Damsel in Distress" trope is over-used. There is certainly room to debate, but that's kind of the point of... well, debate.

As a gamer, I care because, as a medium, we don't want to portray the same hackneyed stories day-after-day-after-day. Innovation is incredibly important for art forms. Think Renaissance.

As a humanist, I care because I don't think we should perpetuate gender inequalities.

As an aside, feminist theory is actually fairly interesting. Especially when you get into 2nd vs. 3rd wave. Now this is personal conjecture, but Anita strikes me as a 3rd wave feminist. In this paradigm, women shouldn't be trying to prove that they can be the same as men, but should be allowed to embrace their femininity, if they so choose. And honestly, I can't think of any character in video games that this applies to.

 

[direkiller]

I have a really hard time comprehending why people think Anita is such a horrible person for simply criticizing games.

Probably because they don't.

People are not disliking her "simply for criticising games". They dislike her for her specific criticisms that they disagree with, not the fact that she has the "audacity" to complain.

I really don't get how this is so hard to understand. I get the impression most people who assume that she is hated purely for being a woman or because she is "A woman daring to criticise games" haven't so much as tried to look at what people are actually taking issue with, but are just trying to un-ironically "character assassinate" anybody who dares to take issue with her particular way of thinking by labelling them as misogynists.

I still have no idea why people would claim that she is, to quote earlier posts in this thread "a psycho", a "bad feminist", or an "extrememist" simply for criticizing the overuse of tropes. You disagree with her critiques? Fine. But calling her a psycho because she criticizes the overuse of the Damsel in Distress trope? I have no idea how you get there.

It's not that she points out tropes
its that she states, trope x is representative of a male dominate society because of a shark jump in her logic,and trying to draw a correlation between real world violence and video games that gets people mad.

Fair enough. There are games with female protagonists (that I'm not going to argue with) but (like you said) they tend to be... a little too few and far between. I was just hoping to give a simple example, as I can't think of many games where women are portrayed as equally competent as men (or that pass the Bechdel test, but that's another story)

The Bechdel test is not exactly something you can apply as a blanket across video games.
Portal fails it, Not because it is sexiest in any way but because only one charter ever talks.

I think you will find alot of video games have weak written woman not out of sexism,but because they are not story focused(thus everyone is a weak charter), or it is extremely charter focused(the charter is all anyone ever talks about), and the player happens to be male.
both are done out of game-play need, rather then underlining or intentional sexsism.

 

[BreakfastMan]

It's not that she points out tropes
its that she states, trope x is representative of a male dominate society because of a shark jump in her logic,and trying to draw a correlation between real world violence and video games that gets people mad.

It isn't a jump in logic, as she explains how she quite clearly gets from one to another and how the overuse of these tropes is reflective of societies values. And still, if people can't take someone pointing out the simple damn fact that roles men are pushed into are more powerful than the roles that women are pushed into... I just don't know anymore. None of it ever seemed like it was ever anything worth getting mad over. But then, I still think the whole "retake Mass Effect" thing was stupid as shit, so what do I know?

 

[Byte2222]

Fair enough. There are games with female protagonists (that I'm not going to argue with) but (like you said) they tend to be... a little too few and far between. I was just hoping to give a simple example, as I can't think of many games where women are portrayed as equally competent as men (or that pass the Bechdel test, but that's another story)

The Bechdel test is not exactly something you can apply as a blanket across video games.
Portal fails it, Not because it is sexiest in any way but because only one charter ever talks.

I think you will find alot of video games have weak written woman not out of sexism,but because they are not story focused(thus everyone is a weak charter), or it is extremely charter focused(the charter is all anyone ever talks about), and the player happens to be male.
both are done out of game-play need, rather then underlining or intentional sexsism.

The Bechdel test is a different matter altogether and we could debate whether or not it's relevant to videogames extensively. Arguably, most conversation is directing or exposition-ing to the player so if the player is male it fails and if the player is female and there is one other female character, it passes. Perhaps, though, this is not best discussed here and now.

You say that women are weakly written "not out of sexism, but because they are not story focused" but why are they out of focus if not for some (not necessarily deliberate or conspicuous) sexism?

 

[direkiller]

You say that women are weakly written "not out of sexism, but because they are not story focused" but why are they out of focus if not for some (not necessarily deliberate or conspicuous) sexism?

Games, unlike outher media, do not have to be about story or charters. They can be entirely about game play or environment, thus as a result all charter are weak.

Exmples

Skyrim:
Skyrim has over 100 charters, but how many would you consider to be well devoloped?
How many of them are woman?(off the top of my head,two Delphine,Serana)

It was not done out of a ill will to woman but because Skyrim is very environment focused. Almost all aspects of the game are geared to you exploring the sandbox

Sid meier's pirates:
Has one woman, the port governors daughters(they all use the same modes). They exsist in the game for two things, a dancing mini game, and to be married.

Now can you consider this sexsist?
yes
was it done out of Sexisim?
no, it was done because they needed to quickly transition the player from one section of the game to the next.

It's not that she points out tropes
its that she states, trope x is representative of a male dominate society because of a shark jump in her logic,and trying to draw a correlation between real world violence and video games that gets people mad.

It isn't a jump in logic, as she explains how she quite clearly gets from one to another and how the overuse of these tropes is reflective of societies values. And still, if people can't take someone pointing out the simple damn fact that roles men are pushed into are more powerful than the roles that women are pushed into... I just don't know anymore. None of it ever seemed like it was ever anything worth getting mad over. But then, I still think the whole "retake Mass Effect" thing was stupid as shit, so what do I know?

Yes they are jumps in logic

example:
Dinosaur planet, was not remade into a star fox game for the reasons she states. It was done because Star fox sells games where a new IP would bring a unnecessary risk. Nintendo has repeatedly show it tries to tie games to it's flagship charters in order to drive sales, rather then "robing female charters of being heroes in there own right".

 

[BreakfastMan]

It's not that she points out tropes
its that she states, trope x is representative of a male dominate society because of a shark jump in her logic,and trying to draw a correlation between real world violence and video games that gets people mad.

It isn't a jump in logic, as she explains how she quite clearly gets from one to another and how the overuse of these tropes is reflective of societies values. And still, if people can't take someone pointing out the simple damn fact that roles men are pushed into are more powerful than the roles that women are pushed into... I just don't know anymore. None of it ever seemed like it was ever anything worth getting mad over. But then, I still think the whole "retake Mass Effect" thing was stupid as shit, so what do I know?

Yes they are jumps in logic

example:
Dinosaur planet, was not remade into a star fox game for the reasons she states. It was done because Star fox sells games where a new IP would bring a unnecessary risk. Nintendo has repeatedly show it tries to tie games to it's flagship charters in order to drive sales, rather then "robing female charters of being heroes in there own right".

There is a difference between the reasons behind taking an action and the consequences of taking that action... Kind of thought that was obvious. :\

 

[direkiller]

It's not that she points out tropes
its that she states, trope x is representative of a male dominate society because of a shark jump in her logic,and trying to draw a correlation between real world violence and video games that gets people mad.

It isn't a jump in logic, as she explains how she quite clearly gets from one to another and how the overuse of these tropes is reflective of societies values. And still, if people can't take someone pointing out the simple damn fact that roles men are pushed into are more powerful than the roles that women are pushed into... I just don't know anymore. None of it ever seemed like it was ever anything worth getting mad over. But then, I still think the whole "retake Mass Effect" thing was stupid as shit, so what do I know?

Yes they are jumps in logic

example:
Dinosaur planet, was not remade into a star fox game for the reasons she states. It was done because Star fox sells games where a new IP would bring a unnecessary risk. Nintendo has repeatedly show it tries to tie games to it's flagship charters in order to drive sales, rather then "robing female charters of being heroes in there own right".

There is a difference between the reasons behind taking an action and the consequences of taking that action... Kind of thought that was obvious. :\

She dose not state it as a consquence. She states it as a reason why they did it, She makes it sound like the game was finished(even stated nearly completed), then reworked because of Shigeru Miyamoto makeing a push.

Rather then what it is was an early beta, with stand in voice acting, reworked into a starfox game.
Which is not that uncomon of a thing, nor dose it have the implied consequence or ill will she attributes to it.

also she manages to lie in the first three minutes.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

I'll admit that her structure leaves a lot to be desired, but I don't see her as being sexist, honestly.

If you go by the two tropes she's analyzed thus far, women in games are supposedly rarely, if ever empowered and typically exist to serve as the token girl to be saved; the empathy trigger that's more or less intended to either reach our basic moral cords (e.g. "Kidnapping is Bad!") or our White Knight urges. I'll also admit that the industry needs to broaden itself a bit and to stop considering its market as being chiefly catered towards men (despite persisting statistics, I know), but honestly?

The average age for current gamers is 18 to 35. Assuming most of us happen to be guys, we're either smack-dab in puberty or well and truly past it. Cheesecake women characters will never fade away entirely. Market research and social trends will always be around to prop up (hehe) the concept of the big-breasted gender-swapped male who's got all the attributes of a typical male character, with an hourglass shape and boobs added for pure titillation. At the same time, the older we'll get, the less we'll need representations like this.

I think the best example of that fact is the Tomb Raider reboot. I don't see it as being just another indicator of the "dark and gritty" reboot trend we've got going on, but rather as a sign that game creators are maturing. Their audience is following right along, so we're finally ready to consider playing a female character without necessarily twirling the camera around to mess with potential jiggle physics.

Character design-wise, though, we still have a ways to go. I suspect Lara Croft's fairly gruelling treatment in the last game is another, indirect take on forcing the player into engagement by pushing his White Knight button repeatedly.

"Oh, God! A nice-looking young woman is being threatened at gunpoint! My controller input must be precise, for I MUST SAVE HER!"

I'd personally rather empathize for a character based on who they are, not based on the fact that they'll die if I bungle an action sequence or a QTE. That's just one hurdle the industry hasn't figured out yet.

So, is she sexist? I don't know. I think I can agree with the content of it all, but the matter in which it's presented and the situational awareness of the industry as a whole leaves a bit to be desired. Yes, gaming is a bit of a sausage fest, but not all of us are insecure cavemen who feel their pride being poked and prodded out of existence by harpies daring to demand better narrative and design-centric treatment.

If there's one severe problem, it's that studios are maturing, but creators haven't quite absorbed the basic concepts needed to build a believable and entirely respectful gallery of female protagonists. Some devs hit that ball out of the park, others are still struggling or just plainly and simply refusing to abandon storied design traditions.

Lookin' at' cha, Team Ninja... I'm saying that while being entirely aware that the core Japanese audience for TN titles tends to be a gaggle of various young males who are culturally encouraged to stick to Jell-O booby fantasies.

 

[Toxic Sniper]

It's funny that people are talking about the same rhetoric being rehashed in a thread that is identical to the roughly fifty billion threads on this same subject in this forum.

Stop being so insecure about this silly person and her poorly made videos and just enjoy your games.

 

[6_Qubed]

Spoiler: spoiler'd for brevity, but left intact

What don't you understand?

Learn more about feminism then.

If you want to know, Anita Sarkeesian is on point in context to feminism as a school of thought. Nothing she has conveyed in her videos is incorrect and she demonstrates her criticism with great clarity and abundant evidence.

Media does have an effect upon us, not directly of course, but ideas conveyed by narrative can leave impressions upon us in the way we interpret things and our own introspective thoughts. (Games like Final Fantasy 7 and Tales of Symphonia for example have had some influence in regards to how I approach ideas in relation to morality or other topics)

If you don't care that is your own fault. You should not blame Anita for your own disinterest in the subject of how women (and men for that matter) are presented in popular media and narrative.

And the fact that people continue to judge her character shows me that they are not interested in actually learning something new, rather going on a petty crusade to assassinate someone who dares speak about awful and problematic things in video games.

The thing is, problematic things DO exist in video games, there is nothing wrong with talking about them. Just because a video game is merely meant to be 'entertainment' like any other form of media, it does not excuse it from greater dialog or insightfulness. How else do you expect people to understand the WHY of things if we just pretend that its 'normal' or expected that representation of women in games are roundly awful? And not just awful, but pretty much stereotyped to the point that the Exceptions always always always float to the top of relevancy because of how much awfulness there actually is!

Though in the end, I could always revel in the fact that Anita brings out the worst in gamer dorks everywhere and make fun of them.

If Anita is a feminist, than I am a banana.

Oh sure, she walks and talks like a feminist. I have no doubt she describes herself as one to whomever has an ear vaguely pointed in her direction. But to borrow a line from Silence of the Lambs, she hates men and thinks that makes her a feminist. But her pathology is far more savage.

Simply put, she joined the revolution to blow trains up. She has no inclination to make them run on time. Why? No idea. Perhaps the trains were laden with bananas.

Her gimmick is pointing out misogyny in video games. However, in no way does she even remotely suggest possible solutions to the problems she highlights. Her modus operandi can be summed up as "Look at me! Look at these problems in video games! Now look at me again! Now pay me money to look at me talk about video game problems! Aren't they problematic? If you're watching this and you're a man, it's probably your fault! Look at me!"

But the biggest problem with Anita Sarkeesian (on whom I did a google search to confirm her name's spelling, and was delighted to find that she is not, in fact, the most searched-for Anita according to Google. Even better, I now know who Anita Pallenberg is! ) is not that she is an asshole with an opinion on the Internet. The biggest problem with her is that, as I mentioned already, she has charged money for her videos. Now, funnily enough I was aware of her before the shit hit the fan, and I even caught a few of her videos. After the smoke from the kickstarter died down, I checked out the videos from her new series. What was the difference? Nothing! No detectable change in quality at all; the title card is the same graphic as her kickstarter, the show is still arranged in the same manner, the shot lined up the same way, the exact same level of research applied. Jesus, she hasn't even bought nicer outfits, let alone something of substance. No second host, no additional writing staff, no additional anything to justify the $160k she pulled in from that kickstarter, just the same rant about the myriad evils being foisted upon women in video games. Mercifully, <url=http://readwrite.com/2013/03/19/anita-sarkeesian-i-love-you-but-please-show-me-the-money>I'm not the only person who's noticed this. I like this link particularly, not only because it backs up what I'm saying, (though that's always a good feeling,) but also that it explores the accusation impartially, giving defense where it is due and exploring the trickier hypotheticals, even providing a few examples of potential solutions! Oh, speaking of; I have two examples of better ways to present and discuss issues with things. Two imperfect examples, admittedly, for reasons which will become clear.

The first is the video series Extra Credits. (Not sure how sensitive The Escapist still is about them so no links, just to be safe. Google is your friend.) This series has tackled sex, sexuality, and racial diversity in games, and has at least one video where they called out a specific game by a specific company and demanded that said company unfuck themselves in a goddamned hurry. (Not in as many words, obviously.) Now, this series may not be to your liking, personally; I don't know you, so I'm not sure how far down the feminist rabbithole you've gone, so you might be put off by both the writer and the "voice" of the series being men, but both James and Daniel are in the court of equality for all (gamers), and the artists make their presence known, from Alison, to the many guest artists they've had while Alison was out getting her arm repaired, to Leelee in the recent episodes. Still though, the series is not a perfect example, if only because they don't focus on the interaction between women and games to the exclusion of all else. But this is not a bad thing, either. Give the show a look, if you haven't already! I promise you'll enjoy it.

The second example I want to bring up is <url=http://jezebel.com/5992479/if-i-admit-that-hating-men-is-a-thing-will-you-stop-turning-it-into-a-self+fulfilling-prophecy>this article, addressing the spectre if misandry and feminists reaction to it. Now, this is just one article, and it has fuck-all to do with video games, but here's what I like about it; It is willing to meet men halfway, without compromising or coddling. The writer addresses a real issue, turning it over in her hands to look at it from different angles (I personally like the "misandry = Freddy Krueger" analogy) and most importantly of all, nobody's accusing anyone of anything! That is fucking magical. This one article on this website makes me want to read other articles on this website, maybe look into ways I can take up the banner of Equality despite belonging to "The Enemy" demographic. (You know, white male, biologically male, heterosexual, and middle class. I even have blue eyes.)

...Wow but this ran longer than what I thought it would. I'd better wrap this up. Looking forward to seeing if your response is as aggressively worded as that first post!

TL;DR "Feminist rabbithole" is the Strangest. Euphemism. Ever.

 

[FalloutJack]

It's funny. I only seem to hear fart-noises when people talk out of their ass. Is it because I'm male?

 

[Wyvern65]

I'll admit that her structure leaves a lot to be desired, but I don't see her as being sexist, honestly.

If you go by the two tropes she's analyzed thus far, women in games are supposedly rarely, if ever empowered and typically exist to serve as the token girl to be saved; the empathy trigger that's more or less intended to either reach our basic moral cords (e.g. "Kidnapping is Bad!") or our White Knight urges. I'll also admit that the industry needs to broaden itself a bit and to stop considering its market as being chiefly catered towards men (despite persisting statistics, I know), but honestly?

The average age for current gamers is 18 to 35. Assuming most of us happen to be guys, we're either smack-dab in puberty or well and truly past it. Cheesecake women characters will never fade away entirely. Market research and social trends will always be around to prop up (hehe) the concept of the big-breasted gender-swapped male who's got all the attributes of a typical male character, with an hourglass shape and boobs added for pure titillation. At the same time, the older we'll get, the less we'll need representations like this.

I think the best example of that fact is the Tomb Raider reboot. I don't see it as being just another indicator of the "dark and gritty" reboot trend we've got going on, but rather as a sign that game creators are maturing. Their audience is following right along, so we're finally ready to consider playing a female character without necessarily twirling the camera around to mess with potential jiggle physics.

Character design-wise, though, we still have a ways to go. I suspect Lara Croft's fairly gruelling treatment in the last game is another, indirect take on forcing the player into engagement by pushing his White Knight button repeatedly.

"Oh, God! A nice-looking young woman is being threatened at gunpoint! My controller input must be precise, for I MUST SAVE HER!"

I'd personally rather empathize for a character based on who they are, not based on the fact that they'll die if I bungle an action sequence or a QTE. That's just one hurdle the industry hasn't figured out yet.

So, is she sexist? I don't know. I think I can agree with the content of it all, but the matter in which it's presented and the situational awareness of the industry as a whole leaves a bit to be desired. Yes, gaming is a bit of a sausage fest, but not all of us are insecure cavemen who feel their pride being poked and prodded out of existence by harpies daring to demand better narrative and design-centric treatment.

If there's one severe problem, it's that studios are maturing, but creators haven't quite absorbed the basic concepts needed to build a believable and entirely respectful gallery of female protagonists. Some devs hit that ball out of the park, others are still struggling or just plainly and simply refusing to abandon storied design traditions.

Lookin' at' cha, Team Ninja... I'm saying that while being entirely aware that the core Japanese audience for TN titles tends to be a gaggle of various young males who are culturally encouraged to stick to Jell-O booby fantasies.

I'm not trying to start an argument here (no, really, I'm not) because you've written a thoughtful, well-reasoned post with some good insights. That being said there are two things you said that are nagging at me and I'd like to hear your take on them:

You highlight the hell Lara goes through in the new Tomb Raider. How is having a female running a gauntlet of terrors in any way different from having a male character do so? I guess what I'm trying to get at here is you're saying it's being done in part to trigger a man's protective instincts, as opposed to simply a depiction of the kinds of crap all games put their leads through (to progress the game and the story.) How should she have been implemented differently to avoid that if you see it as a problem? How do you imagine a woman sees Lara when playing?

What is wrong with the simple existence of jello booby fantasies? I won't be buying a Team Ninja game anytime in the near future, but given the games are very much niche titles why are they problematic? This to me is a speech issue. Is equality here allowing all kinds of depictions of women or only those that aren't deemed offensive?

 

[Byte2222]

You say that women are weakly written "not out of sexism, but because they are not story focused" but why are they out of focus if not for some (not necessarily deliberate or conspicuous) sexism?

Games, unlike outher media, do not have to be about story or charters. They can be entirely about game play or environment, thus as a result all charter are weak.

Exmples

Skyrim:
Skyrim has over 100 charters, but how many would you consider to be well devoloped?
How many of them are woman?(off the top of my head,two Delphine,Serana)

It was not done out of a ill will to woman but because Skyrim is very environment focused. Almost all aspects of the game are geared to you exploring the sandbox

Sid meier's pirates:
Has one woman, the port governors daughters(they all use the same modes). They exsist in the game for two things, a dancing mini game, and to be married.

Now can you consider this sexsist?
yes
was it done out of Sexisim?
no, it was done because they needed to quickly transition the player from one section of the game to the next.

I feel we've come full circle, Ms. Sarkeesian's endeavour is about exactly this: to make us aware that things like this are actually kinda sexist, even if they weren't done deliberately. Are things like this bad? Maybe, but the big step for us as a collective is to stop and ask ourselves. I'm eagerly anticipating her next video, because she'll hopefully posit a better paradigm rather than just pointing stuff out.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

Snip!

On Lara: I think part of the problem stems from the fact that Eidos went for a lead actress with a very vulnerable and delicate vocal range. For the first two or three instances where I first saw Croft getting her ass handed to her by Mother Nature, I pretty much went along with it. Okay, it's a survival game, it's going to be tough on her, so that's fine.

After three hours of that, though, it really gets on my nerves. The game designers are throwing Yamatai at her the same way Raimi used to abuse Bruce Campbell during the filming of Evil Dead 2! It's so intense and omnipresent it really no longer feels like basic survival and acceptable grittiness; it instead starts to evoke the sense that the only Eidos could think of that would make her relatable would be if she was absolutely battered every which way.

Compare that to Nathan Drake's tribulations, for instance. Yeah, he's put through the wringer as well, but it's presented in a much more inconsequential fashion. No blood, no disturbing death-associated imagery, just your average video game-y fall down a chasm that's been determined as being lethal. Most of Nate's deaths are quick, clean and meant to be simple beats in the gameplay, not some sort of punishment for failure.

Back to Croft. She potentially gets her neck snapped and gouged open by wolves, she's shot at, impaled through the abdomen and upper chest, crushed by falling rocks or smashed by the golem-like thingies near the endgame. All in graphic detail. This isn't just a fail state, it's pretty much a glaring judgment of the current player. It's Tomb Raider going "You failed Lara. Now you get to watch her last few seconds of agony. Get ready to see a few snippets of that which you'll see over and over, because the bit where she careens down a set of rapids with nothing but a shotgun is gnarly as fuck."

Yes, it does foster attachment and engagement, but it's also fairly exploitative. So Drake gets quick and clean deaths while Lara gets the horribly gritty finishers? I might be totally wrong, mind you, but this doesn't feel to me like another element of the Gritty Reboot technique. It feels like a lopsided attempt at generating empathy.

There has to be a way for Lara to exist as a compelling character without Torture Porn being needed so the statistical male average feels goaded into protecting her.

I'm thinking that most female Tomb Raider players would choose to focus on the positive aspects of her redesign, which involves her ability to survive difficult situations and to more or less discover her true potential under duress. On the flipside, I'm also fairly convinced that some female players would agree with me in saying that some of the aspects of her ordeal are a tad excessive. Again, overly graphic death scenes.

She's a fairly positive character, don't get me wrong, but the way in which she's offed onscreen feels unnecessary. It isn't needed to set the tone for the game.

As for the speech issue, my personal take on things is that I'd prefer it if Japanese developers who want to export their product made Jell-O Boobies a free unlock, a sort of piece of DLC that's included in the purchase price, and that essentially exists as a toggleable feature. I enjoy Team Ninja games for their fighting engine, for the most part. What I don't enjoy is how certain Japanese fighting game designers assume that most of their Western market also wants to take a gander at these implausible mammary glands.

So, honestly, I'd like to have the option to turn them off. That way those who want 'em could still have 'em, and I'd get the option to look at female figures that actually are appealing to me. That is, female figures with proportional breasts that actually do have fairly sturdy pectoral muscles.

 

[direkiller]

You say that women are weakly written "not out of sexism, but because they are not story focused" but why are they out of focus if not for some (not necessarily deliberate or conspicuous) sexism?

Games, unlike outher media, do not have to be about story or charters. They can be entirely about game play or environment, thus as a result all charter are weak.

Exmples

Skyrim:
Skyrim has over 100 charters, but how many would you consider to be well devoloped?
How many of them are woman?(off the top of my head,two Delphine,Serana)

It was not done out of a ill will to woman but because Skyrim is very environment focused. Almost all aspects of the game are geared to you exploring the sandbox

Sid meier's pirates:
Has one woman, the port governors daughters(they all use the same modes). They exsist in the game for two things, a dancing mini game, and to be married.

Now can you consider this sexsist?
yes
was it done out of Sexisim?
no, it was done because they needed to quickly transition the player from one section of the game to the next.

I feel we've come full circle, Ms. Sarkeesian's endeavour is about exactly this: to make us aware that things like this are actually kinda sexist, even if they weren't done deliberately. Are things like this bad? Maybe, but the big step for us as a collective is to stop and ask ourselves. I'm eagerly anticipating her next video, because she'll hopefully posit a better paradigm rather than just pointing stuff out.

The problem is, Why is the most important question in this, not something that should be ignored like Sarkeesian is doing.

My point was the overall game should be taken into account, if every charter is an object/weak it's not productive to single out the sprite with boobs. Sarkessian is not doing this and is even hand waving away in game context in order to link games to real world violence.

 

[Smeatza]

Just try to bear in mind she's an extremist.
Don't take her any more seriously than you would Al Qaeda.

How is she an extremist?

Perhaps fundamentalist would be a better term, without the religious aspect of course.

Then again, after looking up some definitions.

Extremism (represented on both sides of the political spectrum) is any ideology or political act far outside the perceived political center of a society.
One who advocates or resorts to measures beyond the norm, especially in politics.

Extremist seems to fit as well. They often go hand in hand so its no wonder people use them interchangeably.

 

[aaronobst]

This. I absolutely applaud her ignorance and I love the annotations poking holes in every single one of her baseless "points"

 

[Madgamer13]

Whoah, Anita is an extremist that can be equated to a member of the Al Qaeda? Is this how you guys think Feminism works? She also has no idea about context?

I want what you people are smoking, because the posts against her on this forum are the most downright extreme insult one can think. What do you people want Anita to do? Get back into her kitchen and make her boyfriend/husband/father another sandwich? Ugh.

I've been attending conferences recently about real research and if you think her 20+ minute presentations online are some of the strangest things you've ever heard, you havn't seen what I've been privilaged enough to sit through. Thankfully, I only bother myself with research related to counselling and psychotherapy as of this moment.

If you are missing the context about Anita's videos, then you are demonising her personal context, which is of her chosen feminist approach, then ignoring how she attempts to develop such context. Whether she chooses to turn her feminist approach into sexism, or equally balance a male perspective against a female perspective, is of her own choice and will either detract or reinforce the quality of her presentation. Denying her that choice merely turns you into what you want Anita to be and I am not talking about 'hardline man-hating feminist'

Will you please wait until Anita has finished her current series of videos on tropes vs women before you make your conclusions? Someone like Anita really does need this entire series to properly make her point known, if the first two videos of the damsel in distress trope are anything to go by.

 

[Seydaman]

I wonder if Anita has a boyfriend. Who the fuck would date this psycho? If she does, he's probably some BDSM freak who enjoys being choked and whipped.

Please do not insult an entire community off handedly.

OT: I saw her second view and thought it was kind of interesting, not revelation provoking or mind blowing, but small talk worthy.

 

[Worgen]

Just try to bear in mind she's an extremist.
Don't take her any more seriously than you would Al Qaeda.

How is she an extremist?

Perhaps fundamentalist would be a better term, without the religious aspect of course.

Then again, after looking up some definitions.

Extremism (represented on both sides of the political spectrum) is any ideology or political act far outside the perceived political center of a society.
One who advocates or resorts to measures beyond the norm, especially in politics.

Extremist seems to fit as well. They often go hand in hand so its no wonder people use them interchangeably.

So, shes an extremist because she wants to see the norm of women in games be reversed. Well fuck, I guess I'm an extremist also since I'm tired of constantly seeing kidnapped/murdered wife/daughter as the main motivation for the male main character.