Is it time for feminists to step off our hobby?

[Oroboros]

I don't get how such a large number of people seem to think that feminism and gaming are like oil and water and don't mix. People can be feminists *and* gamers.

I also don't see how progressive desires to see more and better depictions of women and minorities can honestly be seen as an attack on men. Feminism doesn't have to be a zero-sum game where one game having a modestly-dressed heroine as a protagonist means that somewhere another game's male protagonist is obliged to be a musclebound violent thug.

Believe it or not, a lot of people who want to see feminist ideas further represented in games voice their opinions because they *like* playing games, and would *like* to play more games with feminist ideals in mind, not because they are outsiders who vindictively want to destroy someone else's hobby because they don't understand it.

tl;dr Feminists are gamers too.

 

[Duncan Belfast]

Feminists? No.

I don't believe that gaming and fun, and feminism are mutually exclusive. Gaming is a huge ocean, and there's plenty of room for a variety of games catering to a variety of interests and beliefs. Becoming more inclusive won't result in our hobby and our fun being taken away.

Feminazis? Yes. But they need to step off a variety of things, namely feminism.

The people who are intent on demonizing men, and see sexism everywhere, except within. The people who actually are out to take away not just our, but everyone's fun.

Frankly, if a person wants to kill or oppress large quantities of the population in the name of an ideology, then a portmanteau of said ideology and "nazi" seems like the perfect descriptor of their branch of said ideology.

When you use the term "feminazi" you're saying that the feminists, who want women to achieve social, economic, and political equality, want to wipe out out the male race. It's extremely hyperbolic and utterly absurd.

Edit: As a white male, I certainly wouldn't be part of group that wanted to wipe my kind off the map.

I think you need to re-read my post. Particularly the parts where I define what a "Feminazi" is, and make the (I had hoped) clear distinction between it and a rational, level-headed feminist. It worries me immensely that I go out of my way to make the distinction, but people still assume I'm lumping everyone together.

 

[Falling_v1legacy]

criticism is acceptable, but not if it doesnt contribute to making a game better, if a game has a "sexist" character it doesnt become a worse game, is not less entertaining

That's a rather bold statement. How do you know that a game having a sexist character does or does not make a game worse? Would that not depend on the game, and perhaps even who is playing it? Perhaps a person is bored out of their minds over stereotypically limiting characterizations of certains sets of people. Would that not make the game worse for them? And would not better characterization make for a better game, thus validating the criticism?

 

[Tsun Tzu]

I don't get how such a large number of people seem to think that feminism and gaming are like oil and water and don't mix. People can be feminists *and* gamers.

I also don't see how progressive desires to see more and better depictions of women and minorities can honestly be seen as an attack on men. Feminism doesn't have to be a zero-sum game where one game having a modestly-dressed heroine as a protagonist means that somewhere another game's male protagonist is obliged to be a musclebound violent thug.

Believe it or not, a lot of people who want to see feminist ideas further represented in games voice their opinions because they *like* playing games, and would *like* to play more games with feminist ideals in mind, not because they are outsiders who vindictively want to destroy someone else's hobby because they don't understand it.

tl;dr Feminists are gamers too.

This is going to come off as abrasive, but, I assure you, it's primarily meant to be humorous, so don't take it seriously.

See...by and large, gamers don't have a problem with inclusive practices and, contrary to what is apparently the popular belief, actually do want more well written/developed female characters. Or any characters, really. Black, white, trans, gay, octagon, whatever.

Just, you know, not if that translates to the exclusion of or abolishing of the stuff some of us actually enjoy, which is what a lot of this press and politicizing by ideologues seems to be aiming for.

There is absolutely no reason why sexy, fun games can't exist alongside better written, well rounded titles that exemplify diversity and etc. etc. etc. But that's not what this seems to come down to a lot of the time. All too often, the rallying cry is "This is sexist because I say it is, and fuck that and anyone who enjoys it and/or doesn't see what I see in it!"

If it were simply a matter of increasing the number of "modestly-dressed heroines" then there wouldn't be, and isn't, an issue. Love me some female protagonists, actually. Clothed or otherwise. If anything, a female lead makes me more interested in a title, but that's just me...and clearly isn't indicative of the market's tendencies.

Hell, you're talking to a guy who prefers Persona 3 Portable due to the female protagonist and is, honestly, quite depressed that Persona 4 and 5 don't have a female lead.

*sigh*

Seriously, it'd just be nice if I could play a game like Senran Kagura: Burst and not be lambasted as some sort of misogynist monster because I occasionally enjoy ogling anime tits.

Still waiting on that Beyond Good and Evil sequel too.

 

[MrMan999]

You know, a great majority of gamers agree that there should be more female and minority representation in gaming and that there should be more women in the industry. What is not agreed upon is the methods. What these outside feminists did was come in, issue blanket terms and shoddy research and browbeat and insult anyone who didn't agree or just asked a question or two. And quite frankly people are sick of it.

 

[Ariseishirou]

As a gamer since childhood and feminist, no, you can get the hell out of my hobby first.

 

[carnex]

-snip-

I will tell you this much, and this is one of those things that can't be stressed enough. Many use word misogyny because it has power to shame. But just like many other words it's used to shame where it has no place.

I can insult woman all day with gender insults and not fall under the category of misogyny if I have reason OTHER than her gender to insult her. Maybe I'm insulting her because I'm racist and she happens to be of race I'm racist towards. Maybe she crashed my car. Maybe we are fighting over last console in store.

Misogyny is term meant to specifically mean that someone has a hate or intense distrust that resembles hate towards women based on their gender alone or predominantly. Nothing else.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

criticism is acceptable, but not if it doesnt contribute to making a game better, if a game has a "sexist" character it doesnt become a worse game, is not less entertaining

That's a rather bold statement. How do you know that a game having a sexist character does or does not make a game worse? Would that not depend on the game, and perhaps even who is playing it? Perhaps a person is bored out of their minds over stereotypically limiting characterizations of certains sets of people. Would that not make the game worse for them? And would not better characterization make for a better game, thus validating the criticism?

let me put it like this

the birth of a nation, is an extremely racist film about the KKK, it was still praised for its innovative film tachniques (for the time), the fact it was racist didnt really affect the quality of the film

why should making a "sexist" character affect the quality of a game

one could argue the characters are cliche, that would indeed be a valid criticism, but a sexist character doesnt have to eb cliche

 

[Mandalore_15]

And while we might disagree with some creative decisions, ultimately it's the creator's work to do with what he will. Whether that work lives or dies in the court of public opinion is up to us. We can criticise it on its merits, but extrapolating that to making broad statements about the developer's worldview is totally speculative and ultimately fruitless, particularly when they give us more inclusive games and receive just as much, if not more scrutiny.

That right there is both misspelled, and solves your own argument for you. If the significant public opinion were that the representation of women in games is fine, you wouldn't have made this post, because it wouldn't be an issue. It's an issue because a LARGE number of people are finally starting to stand up to passive old guard misogyny and push for actual female equality, not the game industry's, "your pipes are leaking so here's a stopper for your bathtub," mentality. Putting passively heroic women/girls in games as supporting characters does not mean the game has, 'a strong female character.' Especially when you consider the ratio of 'games where women are treated like crap' to the ratio of 'games where women are awesome', the math is simply no where near balanced, even if you narrow your test pool to games in the past 2-3 years.

Additionally, it's the freaking game industry. They make pixel fantasies for a living. Their heroes could be freaking sentient shoe laces trying to make it in a world ruled by despotic candy corn, but instead they choose (the fact of choice is important here), they CHOOSE to make games about grizzled, bearded men, usually white, manipulating, mutilating, beating, raping and killing basically anyone who isn't just like them, and even a few who are, including women. Then they shove it in our face and tell us how awesome it is through every media outlet known to humanity.

In short, the reason you're seeing games lambasted so thoroughly is because they ARE dying in the court of public opinion, BECAUSE they don't portray women in equal light.

If they are dying in the court of public opinion I'm really not sure how, as games sales have never been higher. Triple A's being the market that most of these complaints are leveled at haven't ceded any market share, so I honestly don't see it.

So you say that games having women in as supporting characters does not mean having a "strong female character"... does that mean that in your opinion a female character can only be "strong" if she's the central/player character? What about games like Half-Life 2 where Gordon Freeman is a floating orb with zero personality - basically a conduit for the player to enter the world - and Alex, arguably a supporting character, is one of the best-loved characters in PC gaming? Does the fact that you don't play her invalidate her?

To me this just sounds like trying to justify a position by any means necessary. There are many well loved supporting characters, in many ways loved more than the central ones, whether it be Clank, Daxter, Elizabeth, Ellie, Cortana, Cole Train... If they are all "passively heroic" to you then I think you have a bit of a black and white view of storytelling.

Also, on a pedantic note, could you point out what exactly I misspelled?

To me this just sounds like trying to justify a position by any means necessary.

Pretty much answered your own post there...again.

Now, to address your key complaints;

a) Sales =/= Opinion. If no one knows a game will be bad, they will buy it out of ignorance and discover later that they don't like it. Similarly, even if someone knows they won't like it, they may still buy it to ensure they are well informed enough to discuss exactly why they don't like it with accurate, firsthand references, should they come up in discussion. I'm afraid your statement on this front is less of a rebuttal and more of a redirect. My point still stands, if significant public opinion were that these games were fine, you wouldn't be complaining about people lambasting them in this thread.

b) Again, you're not addressing my argument, you're redirecting. The hip internet colloquialism for it is 'strawman argument' I believe? To take your example of Alex Vance from Half Life 2; Yes, she's awesome. Yes, she's cool. She does qualify as a strong supporting character. But does her presence there balance out all of the games depicting brutality against, and institutionalized disenfranchisement of women in that same year? No, it does not. Furthermore she herself is damseled, at points, in order to let the player, grizzled white nerd guy Gordon Freeman, feel heroic about saving her. Furthermore, supporting characters are, by definition, tertiary and easily disposed of during a game if the story 'calls for it'. So even though Alex Vance could be a strong female character, she's not, because her position as tertiary aid/motivation for the main character, grizzled white nerd Gordon Freeman, renders her presence entirely optional. A strong female game character IS the heroine of the game, not next to the hero, not good at watching the hero's back, she IS the heroine. To put it in simple terms, a strong female game character is;

1) The lead heroine
2) Independent
3) Tough
4) Resourceful
5) No matter how bad the situation gets, she's always capable of solving her own problems without additional assistance

The number of female game characters who fit all those descriptors can be counted on two hands, maybe stretching to your toes if you really dig through indy games. Compare that to how many hands and feet you'd need to count the number of 'macho guy saves helpless damsel' games out there.

c) No, I will not save you the seemingly insurmountable effort of using the spellchecker on your own posts.

Stop making inflammatory statements without backing them up. If I "answer my own post" then explain how, otherwise you're just mouthing off with nothing to show for it.

a) True to an extent (of course the extent of review coverage and try before you buy options is huge), but we are not talking about about the quality of games affecting sales but whether or not people deem them to be sexist. Do you really think that with the amount of coverage of a game put out before it was released, people wouldn't be able to decide whether or not they have a problem with the representation of gender in the game? When I watched the footage for Bioshock Infinite over a year before it was released I knew that Elizabeth would be a supporting character, that Booker was rescuing her, and that at a certain point in the game the tide of their relationship changes and she saves you. There were no "surprises" about gender in the game, just as there aren't from any game. People purchasing games have a HUGE amount of information about games before their purchase (too much in my opinion). So yes, sales of AAA games really do indicate a lack of widespread controversy about gender.

As for people buying games they know they won't like, I'd just have to say "get real". In an economic crisis, who would piss away £45/$60 on a AAA game they know they'll hate? There is no redirect here. The games industry is tied to its community and media coverage more than other media because you have a lot more to lose on a games purchase than buying a cinema ticket. People rarely pick up big budget games on impulse, they generally make the decision before reaching the shop shelf.

b) So you basically claim I've set up a straw man argument and then go on to show you made that exact argument... don't claim the use of logical fallacies if you don't know what they mean! So yeah, in your world there are NO strong female characters if they are supporting characters, so I guess every character in a film or other media that isn't the protagonist is pointless? You really have to realise that you are setting up an impossible standard for developers to meet without making every player character a "strong woman" and every supporting character a mewling pussy who basically basks in her glory.

And your point about Alex in HL2 basically dismisses every time she saves Gordon - which is more often than he does her - but I would expect cherry picking in such an argument. How about the time she digs him out of a pile of rubble at the very beginning of Episode 1, when she saves a disarmed Gordon from Combine soldiers at the beginning of the main game, or the many, MANY other times that she saves him, is indispensable in navigating puzzles or providing him with backup? She is entirely capable as a character, but you can't see it because you've set up an impossible standard like a creationist who can't see evolution because we don't have the skeleton of every creature that lived over 350 million years.

And point number 5. just gets to the crux of the matter, doesn't it? You can't see any character as strong who can't make it on their own, who doesn't have that element of "I don't need no man!". Did you ever stop to consider that NOBODY gets anywhere in life without the help of someone else? You don't get a job without someone taking a risk on you, you don't get healthcare without a doctor, you can't pay for a house without a mortgage... You basically want games to feature the "uber woman" with no regards to reality, and you know what? Most people hate that stuff. We WANT flawed characters, we WANT to see people who can't overcome problems learn the values of teamwork or trust, or build relationships with others. No-one outside of the hardcore feminist camp is interested in seeing a flawless paradigm of femininity, just as we're not interested in flawless masculinity. Every good character has flaws, that's THE POINT.

And the idea that games show the "brutality against, and institutionalized disenfranchisement of women" needs more explanation. Such as, what games exist that show the violence happening EXCLUSIVELY against women, and also CONDONE those actions against women? Every game that has been debated in this sphere fails the test, such as Watch_Dogs where you save women from the brutality against them. It's not going to have much moral impetus if you don't show their objectification, and the game basically says that saving those women is a good thing, so I don't see how it's problematic. The only game I would pause to give you is GTA, but then it still doesn't condone said actions as you only sleep with prostitutes to gain health, killing them afterwards is an entirely player-driven action with no influence from the game. And as far as I'm aware (from your original post) there are no positive depictions in gaming of rape, and neither am I aware of any games in which the player character can commit rape. So basically, you are going to have to provide some STRONG examples of games here, not to mention come up with some way to extrapolate that to the industry as a whole.

c) Right... you do know there are other forms of English other than American, right? Like British (y'know, the ones that invented it). I spellcheck all my posts, and I even double-checked that one especially for you: squeeky clean. But again, if you want to point out mistakes I'm happy to hear them.

 

[Netrigan]

honestly at this point i dont even know what they want, ive seen countless female characters being critized for what i consider the most stupid of reasons, itd be easier and much MUCH more productive if these people made games with the characters they want instead of critizing games for not having the characters they want

Considering the wide range of people in the feminist movement, is it really any different than fandom. If I was to go by the comments at Gallifrey Base, then I could declare that Doctor Who fans think every single episode of Doctor Who is awful. Not a single exception, they're all crap. I could line up quotes for every single episode if I so choose.

Therefore no one should ever listen to anything a Doctor Who fan ever has to say about Doctor Who, because they clearly hate everything.

Except they don't. There are simply so many voices with so many different ideas of what is good and bad, that trying to paint them as a single entity is self-evidently absurd. Feminists are no less fragmented than that. They barely agree on the broadest of issues, much less things such as "is this sexist?" or "is this is a good female character?" I've got feminist friends who can only take so much of it, because someone or other is always on about something they think is pointless.

It doesn't mean the process is useless. It just means you have to make up your own mind and filter out the stuff you think is noise. Get beyond that in Doctor Who fandom and you find a bunch of people who are really excited about one of their favorite shows. There's never a shortage of people to discuss the most recent episode in a sane and reasonable way... because the ones saying "worst episode ever" aren't worth talking to.

thats absolutely understandable, the problem is, i dont think doctor who fans insult you if you like one particular episode (atleast i hope so), thats the problem with modern feminism, if you like something one of them considers offensive, their first response seems to be insulting you

atleast when it comes to video game, i think they would probably benefit from turning into something like, a fan club of female characters, instead of waving the flag of a political movement, becuase you know, if they want to be a political movement they better start agreeing on stuff and become more consistent

and im not using the term "fan club of female characters" as an insult, they could try talking about the positive despictions of women in gaming and less people would have such poor opinions of them

Okay, that makes me laugh.

Fans are exactly the sort of people who will insult you for liking or not liking the wrong thing. Especially in between fandoms (Halo fans thinking Call of Duty is stupid, Call of Duty fans thinking Halo is stupid), but in your longer lasting fandoms, there's all sorts of factions. Star Wars fans who look down on Jar Jar fans. TOS fans who look down on JJ Abrams Star Trek movie fans. Classic Who fans looking down on Nu Who fans. Doctor Who is perhaps the most fractured of all because there are so many different Eras. There are people who will think you of sub-normal intelligence if you don't think "Kinda" and "Ghostlight" aren't among the best stories ever produced in Who. Other fans will think you a pretentious wanker for thinking either is enjoyable.

I've got plenty of problems with various factions of Feminism, but generally speaking those factions have the lowest success ratio of getting their ideas into the mainstream. The rank and file (if you will) are generally pretty reasonable. Yes, they have a habit of seeing sexism where there may not be any, but if they can't make the argument the complaint won't gain any traction.

And part of this is to learn how to spot "let him and you fight" articles in the media. There's a lot of bootstrapping of stories in the media and an easy way to start a story is to take some isolated criticism, give it a wider audience, and hope someone completely loses their shit responding to it. Entertainment media is especially bad at it, often starting celebrity fights. Right now, the entertainment media has gamers' numbers and they're trolling gamers for all its worth. They know there are fairly large swatches withint he gaming community who simply cannot take any feminist-based criticism and they just have to wave the flag in front of us to get us to start saying really stupid shit that they can report.

 

[Netrigan]

criticism is acceptable, but not if it doesnt contribute to making a game better, if a game has a "sexist" character it doesnt become a worse game, is not less entertaining

That's a rather bold statement. How do you know that a game having a sexist character does or does not make a game worse? Would that not depend on the game, and perhaps even who is playing it? Perhaps a person is bored out of their minds over stereotypically limiting characterizations of certains sets of people. Would that not make the game worse for them? And would not better characterization make for a better game, thus validating the criticism?

let me put it like this

the birth of a nation, is an extremely racist film about the KKK, it was still praised for its innovative film tachniques (for the time), the fact it was racist didnt really affect the quality of the film

why should making a "sexist" character affect the quality of a game

one could argue the characters are cliche, that would indeed be a valid criticism, but a sexist character doesnt have to eb cliche

Being horribly racist has hurt the reputation of Birth of a Nation to the point where it's one of the tougher films to get a theatrical viewing. It's an undeniably great film for technical reasons, but it's not something many people will say "you have to watch this film" for entertainment value. The same is not true of Citizen Kane, which is frequently recommended for entertainment value, especially to anyone who enjoys films of its era.

I'm going to break up the sexism response into two parts, one for the two aspects I see.

First is for sexist works which reflect the sexism of their time or creator. One of the problems with Birth of a Nation is it was racist for its time and there was controversy out of the gate, but there's plenty of films whose racism/sexism is in line with its era and we often give these films a bit of a pass. They're still the subject of well-deserved critiques. I'm a Doctor Who fan and this is frequently a subject of discussion as there's a lot of racism and sexism in a show that's been around for 51 years. Thankfully, the show has largely been a bit progressive within its respective eras, so it's not judged too unkindly; but lots of very valid critiques of those stories exist and rightfully so.

Secondly, deliberately using sexism in a story not intended to be sexist. This is pretty common on TV these days with the anti-hero shows. The Shield, Sons of Anarchy, Mad Men, etc. are all shows in which the sexism of the men involved is part of their character and attempt to show how it's an undesirable part of their character, although that sexism might be intertwined with noble aspects of their character, so it's not a black/white issue. Generally speaking, these shows don't take the issue head-on. Maybe a female character will complain about how she's being treated. And broadly speaking, they don't get called out too much, because I think most people understand these shows are acting as criticism of these behaviors, even if they're sort of reveling in it. Certainly the critiques I've read have been fairly careful of laying down blanket statements, although there is a growing feeling that it's time to move on a bit.

Anyway, in the past, I've criticized games like Watch Dogs because even if their heart is in the right place, the writing isn't up to snuff. It's tough writing a sexist character/scene which is designed to be a criticism of sexism. Hit it too hard, then it's just a heavy handed message (such as Trevor's after-torture conversation in GTA V is just the writers trying to make sure you know that they know that torture is stupid and bad), don't hit it hard enough then you're unwittingly endorsing sexism... and let's face it, people miss the obvious intent of these kinds of things easily enough.

 

[R0guy]

You do realize most of the "controversies" in any fandom are just a handful of voices sounding off. Only on very rare occasions when fandom rises up (such as the Mass Effect 3 ending controversy) does anyone expect anyone to really do anything about it. If someone makes a compelling argument why something should change, then writers and devs tend to stand up and take notice. Usually it's just noise.

You're not reading. Anita and the gaming press arn't random angry "fandoms".

I must have imagined all those bits where she plays the same line of dialogue from a dozen different games and chastises them for lazy writing.

Give the choice, they'll probably save the girl because they're more inclined to like them,

You're contradicting yourself. Is it lazy writing or is it developpers just creating stories for their target audience? Pick one.

If I saw a game description which stated I had to raid the castle to save the girl, I wouldn't be able to put it back on the shelf fast enough. The scenario pretty much screams "boring character alert".

Because you play Super Mario or Super MeatBoy or Castle Crashers for the storyline? While that's a perfectly fine opinion, games have never needed to have a "deep" story with "well-rounded" characters to be successful. I'll keep my sales numbers for Mario games as proof, there are many, many other examples if you want them.

Passing the Bechdel test is meaningless. Even Feminists readily admit this. The test is only good at taking the room temperature, not the temperature of any individual work.

Are you serious? You called that article "brilliant" and now you're backtracking? Also what "feminists"? Which denomination? 2nd wave, 3rd wave, FEMEN, egalitarian...?

If you dig into what women are saying, you find what they want are more well-rounded and interesting female characters.

Firstly, who are you to say what half of the world's population want? I'd like to see some poll numbers, please. Secondly, this "desire" simply does not materialise in the statistics we have available. Just as an example, only 18% of the Mass Effect playerbase actually play as a "well-rounded" (whatever that means) female character. http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/122880-See-How-Your-Mass-Effect-Choices-Compare-to-Everyone-Elses

In a lot of ways, the way you're talking reminds me of all those people who get pissed off that someone ruined Toy Story's perfect score on Rotten Tomatoes, or got pissed off that someone dared give GTA V a 9/10 instead of a perfect score.

You really need to take off those gender-war goggles, pal. I rate my games and movies by a combination of gameplay, directing, photography, editing, soundtrack, acting, voice acting, script, special effects, length, subject matter etc. Not just wether or not it abides by some bizarre (and pointless) social engineering quota like you seem to be arguing for.

 

[AkaDad]

-snip-

I will tell you this much, and this is one of those things that can't be stressed enough. Many use word misogyny because it has power to shame. But just like many other words it's used to shame where it has no place.

I can insult woman all day with gender insults and not fall under the category of misogyny if I have reason OTHER than her gender to insult her. Maybe I'm insulting her because I'm racist and she happens to be of race I'm racist towards. Maybe she crashed my car. Maybe we are fighting over last console in store.

Misogyny is term meant to specifically mean that someone has a hate or intense distrust that resembles hate towards women based on their gender alone or predominantly. Nothing else.

I really didn't need a lesson on the definition of misogyny.

When people keep insulting, attacking, and basically lying about black people they get called racist.

When people keep insulting, attacking, and basically lying about Jews they get called anti-semetic.

When people keep insulting, attacking, and basically lying about women and their beliefs, they get called sexist or misogynistic.

If people don't like that, then I suggest people stop doing it.

 

[AkaDad]

Feminists? No.

I don't believe that gaming and fun, and feminism are mutually exclusive. Gaming is a huge ocean, and there's plenty of room for a variety of games catering to a variety of interests and beliefs. Becoming more inclusive won't result in our hobby and our fun being taken away.

Feminazis? Yes. But they need to step off a variety of things, namely feminism.

The people who are intent on demonizing men, and see sexism everywhere, except within. The people who actually are out to take away not just our, but everyone's fun.

Frankly, if a person wants to kill or oppress large quantities of the population in the name of an ideology, then a portmanteau of said ideology and "nazi" seems like the perfect descriptor of their branch of said ideology.

When you use the term "feminazi" you're saying that the feminists, who want women to achieve social, economic, and political equality, want to wipe out out the male race. It's extremely hyperbolic and utterly absurd.

Edit: As a white male, I certainly wouldn't be part of group that wanted to wipe my kind off the map.

I think you need to re-read my post. Particularly the parts where I define what a "Feminazi" is, and make the (I had hoped) clear distinction between it and a rational, level-headed feminist. It worries me immensely that I go out of my way to make the distinction, but people still assume I'm lumping everyone together.

That word was coined by a known racist and sexist. Anyone who uses that incredibly insulting and hyperbolic word shouldn't be taken seriously. As soon as I see that word I stop reading and move on.

 

[Netrigan]

Passing the Bechdel test is meaningless. Even Feminists readily admit this. The test is only good at taking the room temperature, not the temperature of any individual work.

Are you serious? You called that article "brilliant" and now you're backtracking? Also what "feminists"? Which denomination? 2nd wave, 3rd wave, FEMEN, egalitarian...?

Jesus, you really are about the all-or-nothing approach. Because I praise an article doesn't mean I agree with absolutely every point in it. I thought I had made the elements I was praising clear. Apparently I didn't.

The context of my calling the article brilliant was in supplying numerous examples of male-centric stories which didn't have to hand in their balls to be inclusive. Furious 6 is a uber-male fantasy filled with fast cars, hot girls, and over-the-top action.... and it was more inclusive and treated its female characters with more respect than a franchise which has been hitting the diversity button as hard as it possible can for close to 50 years. The point is being inclusive tends to add more than it takes away.

Star Wars, boys fantasy, lots of female fans. Terminator 1 & 2, classic sci-fi action films and plenty of female fans. Doctor Who, my personal favorite, was watched by all age groups and both sexes despite skewing toward boys. All of these were inclusive. All them are freakin' awesome.

As far as the Bechdel Test goes, virtually every time I've seen a Feminist talk about it they've stressed that passing or failing the test doesn't make your movie sexist or non-sexist. The Patron Anti-Christ of Gaming, Miss S... she's said it in a few of videos. If someone made a movie called, "Women And Why They're Horrible, Horrible People And I Hate Them All" and it featured a scene where two women talk about shoes and how they're so horribly irresponsible that they spend all their rent money on shoes every month... that movie would pass the Bechdel Test. Where as a super-serious Feminist movie where all the character spend all their time talking about how men oppress them would fail. Remember, the test came about from a gag in a comic book. It was just expressing a frustration that too many movies don't show women having aspects of their life which don't revolve around men... and it's been horribly misused ever sense.

You're the one who seems to think it's significant. I'm sorry if I don't fit your stereotype by thinking it's mostly bullshit.

 

[BakedSardine]

I took only a few feminists seriously after reading this:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/386651/feminists-failure-rotherham-ian-tuttle

http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/1400-girls-raped-in-rotherham-england-and-big-league-feminists-dont-care/


"In Rotherham there is a real-life ?rape culture.? But you will not learn anything new about it from Salon, the Daily Beast, Jezebel, or Slate. It has gone unmentioned at Feministing, ***** Media, or the Feminist Majority Foundation. There have been no outraged op-eds from Jenny Kutner, Jessica Valenti, or Samantha Leigh Allen.

These are, apparently, not the rapes they are looking for."


"The power of this fear is astonishing. Even in America, an ocean and many time zones away, feminists and other Social Justice Warriors dare not discuss the Rotherham rapes because to do so is to invite the punishments of ostracization and defamation, possibly resulting in the complete destruction of their social standing."

WHOA! Was not aware of this and extremely disturbing. This quote says it all:

"The moral of this story is clear?those who do not protect and pursue their own interests because of ideology or deception are exploited by those who do."

 

[thethird0611]

-snip-

I will tell you this much, and this is one of those things that can't be stressed enough. Many use word misogyny because it has power to shame. But just like many other words it's used to shame where it has no place.

I can insult woman all day with gender insults and not fall under the category of misogyny if I have reason OTHER than her gender to insult her. Maybe I'm insulting her because I'm racist and she happens to be of race I'm racist towards. Maybe she crashed my car. Maybe we are fighting over last console in store.

Misogyny is term meant to specifically mean that someone has a hate or intense distrust that resembles hate towards women based on their gender alone or predominantly. Nothing else.

I really didn't need a lesson on the definition of misogyny.

When people keep insulting, attacking, and basically lying about black people they get called racist.

When people keep insulting, attacking, and basically lying about Jews they get called anti-semetic.

When people keep insulting, attacking, and basically lying about women and their beliefs, they get called sexist or misogynistic.

If people don't like that, then I suggest people stop doing it.

Actually, you really do need a lesson. We have seen through this last controversy that many people, men specifically, have pushed more for women in game and equality than the 'Media Press'.

Are you gonna call NeoGAF racist, since when he was told by a woman that she was #nothisshield, that he insulted her saying her vagina was huge?

Are you going to call many of the people who compare male gamers to ISIS misandrist? Since that is exactly what you are saying about men to women.

No. Your not. Because you have it in your mind that 'Misogyny' fits, when it really doesn't. Sexist barely even fits.

I am now going to start calling everyone who calls me a misogynist a misandrist, because they are lieing about men and our beliefs, and they get called sexist or misandrist.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

...because they are lieing about men and our beliefs...

"Our beliefs"?

Pray tell, what is a universal belief shared by men?

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Thank God someone made a website called avoiceformen, because men clearly needed a place on the internet where they can voice their opinions.

avoiceformen is an MRA echo chamber. If you want to be convinced that the world is full of boogity-boogity feminists coming to steal your penis, avoiceformen is the site for you.

Not to go all Godwin's Law, but coming across a reference to avoiceformen in a discussion on gender politics is like discussing racial politics and having someone quote Mein Kampf at you.

 

[AkaDad]

-snip-

I will tell you this much, and this is one of those things that can't be stressed enough. Many use word misogyny because it has power to shame. But just like many other words it's used to shame where it has no place.

I can insult woman all day with gender insults and not fall under the category of misogyny if I have reason OTHER than her gender to insult her. Maybe I'm insulting her because I'm racist and she happens to be of race I'm racist towards. Maybe she crashed my car. Maybe we are fighting over last console in store.

Misogyny is term meant to specifically mean that someone has a hate or intense distrust that resembles hate towards women based on their gender alone or predominantly. Nothing else.

I really didn't need a lesson on the definition of misogyny.

When people keep insulting, attacking, and basically lying about black people they get called racist.

When people keep insulting, attacking, and basically lying about Jews they get called anti-semetic.

When people keep insulting, attacking, and basically lying about women and their beliefs, they get called sexist or misogynistic.

If people don't like that, then I suggest people stop doing it.

Actually, you really do need a lesson. We have seen through this last controversy that many people, men specifically, have pushed more for women in game and equality than the 'Media Press'.

Are you gonna call NeoGAF racist, since when he was told by a woman that she was #nothisshield, that he insulted her saying her vagina was huge?

Are you going to call many of the people who compare male gamers to ISIS misandrist? Since that is exactly what you are saying about men to women.

No. Your not. Because you have it in your mind that 'Misogyny' fits, when it really doesn't. Sexist barely even fits.

I am now going to start calling everyone who calls me a misogynist a misandrist, because they are lieing about men and our beliefs, and they get called sexist or misandrist.

Why would I call someone a racist for insulting someone's vagina? That makes no sense.

As far I know, 1 person stupidly compared gamers to ISIS, not many people. I, as a feminist, said it was stupid.

My consistency, let me show you it.

If there are women out there constantly insulting, attacking, and lying about men, not just one-off stupidity, then yes, people are going to think they're misandrists, especially if they just recently became a site member and that's all they did.