Jimquisition: Solving the Sexism Situation

[Verrenxnon]

I take him more as radical stand-up (and not all that funny) as opposed to well-thought out discussion.

Here's another idea: why should we HAVE to do anything? Ameliorations of that nature take the teeth out of the material.

 

[evilstonermonkey]

This is HUGELY better than the first video in every way. I am glad I gave it a second chance. I have a few comments on it, both to say what I felt was good and what I feel could do with a little more finetuning.
-The language was much better this time round. I am no prude, in fact I am a foul mouthed ************ at times, but your first video grossly overused profanity to the point where it not only lost it's effect but it actually got off-putting. This time the first f-bomb got dropped around the 2.30 mark, and was actually kinda funny.
-One of the recurring complaints was the lack of clips/pics. Clearly that was taken on board, and the addition of more improved things, but I think it still needs a little tinkering. To me it felt like the clips interrupted the video, instead of enhancing it. I would suggest showing silent clips that tie in with what you are saying, while you speak over it.
-I have heard that the first one was done as one take in order to go for improv freeflow or something, and I'm not sure if that was the case, but this time around your speech flowed much better and seemed more polished. Whether this is because you were better prepared, practiced the speech beforehand or whatever, I would say stick with it.
-MS Paint penises aren't funny any more. Most of us are past the 8th grade. Sorry. This is a similar point to the language thing - crudity can be funny, but crudity for crudity's sake tends to just seem childish.
-The background this time wasn't really much better than the white one... It made me think of a nazi rally for some reason. I don't know what to suggest here really, since static backgrounds are going to be boring no matter what, and non-static backgrounds can get pretty complicated.
-The topic. Last week's topic was a bit of a flop - telling the escapist movies =/= games is like telling the pope there's a difference between jews and christians. Today's topic was much better. Sure, most of us here will easily enough admit that games can often be sexist, but instead of just telling us something we already know you actually discussed it, made some valid points, and expressed them with some humour. Nice choice, and it was helped by the whole Duke Nukem thing making it topical.
-Sounds quality was better all round - you spoke clearly and the mic picked it all up.

End wall of text. All in all I think it was a great improvement - I loathed the first vid, but the second has impressed me. I look forward to seeing how the video progresses as you find your feet, finetune your style and figure out what works best for you. Good luck.

 

[AyreonMaiden]

I LOVE Jim Sterling from his Dtoid articles and his older Jimquisitions. I agree with a lot of what he says and I actually find his SRSBSNS style really funny. I hope he stays.

In my opinion, God knows gamers need more GARME JURNILIZM! in their lives to counteract the tired ass snooty "edumacated" essays and panels over topics covered a million times before that frankly no one at all seems to give a shit about. We've been passing this and many other issues back and forth, but shit games still exist, politicians still hate us, Roger Ebert will NEVER take you seriously, popular television still barely gets it right when lampooning us, and scantily clad females haven't gone away.

But here is what HAS happened, in spite of that: Indie games have seen a resurgence, art games have become more popular, the game industry is the biggest entertainment industry in the world, and more headstrong female characters have been popping up as the quality of storytelling increases.

Here's a secret...

There's room in the world for EVERYTHING! Clothed characters, scantily clad ones, ugly characters, sexy characters, flat characters, deep ones, doesn't matter. Some women are headstrong, others are not. Some are warriors, others are princesses. There's a dealer for your drug, and that's what makes the world beautiful. Sexy, slutty, flat characters don't need to disappear altogether. Nothing needs to disappear in order to simply MAKE MORE GAMES WITH HEADSTRONG/FULLY CLOTHED/"DEEP"/WHATEVER WILL SATE YOUR POLITICAL AGENDA FEMALES.

There is nothing more infuriating to me as a gamer than seeing another "serious" essay or panel or video about these "serious issues," or another editorial on why Mario is the quintessential everything of everything. I'm sick of people trying to sound "intelligent" and the "intelligentsia" only focusing on the negativity and HERPDEDERP WHAT WE NEED TO CHANGE IN ORDER TO MOVE FORWARD. It's gotten stale and boring. This is why I not only welcome Jim Sterling's style, but find it completely riotous. Keep it up, man.

 

[btenkink]

Not everybody gets LoadingReadyRun's work but that hasn't stopped them from producing several successful shows for The Escapist.

Jim may be dealing with samey content, but the format will improve with time. Give Jim a chance to re-vamp his Youtube-esque production quality and zero-budget graphics department.

Even Yahtzee was once just a Youtube guttersnipe, and if Jim happens to be wayy different from everything else on this site, is that necessarily bad?

I say give him another couple episodes, see what happens

 

[Jonluw]

I think the show could really benefit from some better sound quality. I can't bear to listen to the acoustics in the room he's in.

 

[messy]

OK I'm not sure if that's satirical or not, I sort of hope it is. Because objectifying everyone in video games is just adding more the overwhelming list of things that make people feel self concious,lead to eating disorders, increased levels of plastic surgery and un-realistic aims when it comes to interactions with the opposite sex.

The notion that sexism can be solved by dragging everyone into the visually focused gutter is just stupid. Its the equivalent of "its not racist if we attack everyone."

Judging by this "http://gomakemeasandwich.blogspot.com/2011/02/in-his-words-why-jim-sterling-is-in.html" its not a joke.

Also the argument "its in our genetics." Gets really irritating when spouted from the mouth of someone you can't help but think doesn't fully grasp molecular biology. Yes Men find women attractive, but its also in our genetics to reproduce as much as possible, compete directly with out siblings for food (to the point where their death is OK as long as our genes survive) and attack strangers.

However humanity has the ability to not solely be products of our genetic inheritance. And looking at breasts is fine, but to make a women purely breasts is just awful plain awful. Because it doesn't even make sense logically to think of women purely in in a sexual light. Think of all the possible discoveries that would've been made earlier had women been treated as equals. Yes that's right women contribute to the world as well! Over sexualising (sp_ men in video games will only reach equality in some perverted and twisted sense (as outlined above).

 

[WanderingFool]

Im sorry, did anyone else think of this while watching?

 

[Stammer]

Oh FFS, now this guy's episode picture is a pair of giant gazongas? I don't even need to watch the video to find out that I'm pissed off about this episode.

Obviously some people do like him, so I propose he's moved to a biweekly column. That way everybody wins. But seriously, this guy pisses me off. And it's not like you can ignore him. His face is always there and his gazongas picture is going to be sitting there for two more effing weeks like that "Lesbian?" picture was for the last two weeks.

EDIT after having seen the video: All right, fair enough, this was a much better episode than the last one. You're off the hook for now Jim.

 

[bobknowsall]

When I look upon this video, I am reminded of a story about the late Hermione Gingold. During a performance, she was interrupted by a small child asking her mother:
"Mummy, what is that lady for?"

The other writers and video makers on this site are genuinely decent, and I can respect their ability even if I don't agree with them (Like MovieBob, for instance. Don't like his opinions, but he is cogent about them). This guy doesn't sit well with me, though.

His delivery is poor, his structure is nonexistent, and he doesn't actually seem to have a point that he's working towards. And as for this:

"Well, it's simple genetics, really."
No it isn't. It really, really isn't. Even if that were the case, it wouldn't be an excuse.

In conclusion, dear Escapist, I ask you this:
"Moderators, what is this man for?"

 

[Ukomba]

Really not getting this guy's humor and there's nothing else here.

 

[end_boss]

A different, perhaps more radical, solution:

How 'bout we objectify no one, and only place men or women in revealing clothing when it is tangential to exploring their character and/or fits their cultural/geographical background. You know, as in good storytelling that is inclusive and realistic at the same time.

This one sentence was better than his whole entire segment.

 

[Zing]

Honestly, 200% better than the first episode. Glad I gave Jim another chance, I actually made it through this one and laughed quite a bit at "Diddle the Duke" mode, somehow jims interpretation of fiddling with Duke Nukem balls was hilarious to me.

Besides, there are tons of incidents of semi-naked men in video games. And they all have disproportionate muscles and defining manly features that most men don't have. Examples: Kratos, Conan, most of the street fighter dudes. The difference here is that guys don't actually give a shit if we're "sexualized" in video games.

 

[Dak_N_Jaxter]

I've been un-ironically saying this for ages.

On a side not, is it weird that the flexing torsos didn't bother me, but the duke balls did?

 

[JMeganSnow]

I'm Jennifer Snow and I approve this message.

From what I understand, it's hard to go wrong with an attractive female protagonist in a game. Women like to play as a hot chick. Men like to play as a hot chick. Everybody wins. What makes it bizarre is how BAD games with an attractive female protagonist often turn out to be. It's like the devs got distracted by their own cheesecake and forgot to make a good game.

So what you do is, you make the hot female protagonist DLC.

 

[Frozengale]

I gotta be honest. I was hoping that when this guy didn't post a video in the past 3 weeks I thought the Escapist might have scrapped him. I'm basically going to reiterate my points that I did on his last video because they still apply here.

We already have enough opinion shows and similar type shows on the Escapist. We have MovieBob with his Big Picture. We have Extra Credits. We have Yahtzee's Extra Punctuation. We know have the E-mail debates between Yahtzee, Graham, James, Mikey, and basically everyone worth listening too. And then we have podcasts by Yahtzee and Mikey which I'm sure will also increase to include Graham, James, and anyone worth listening too. In short why do we need Jim? He doesn't say anything that hasn't been said before expect he is 10x more vulgar. I prefer MovieBob, he is blunt and he has interesting opinions and he basically has the same shtick as this guys trying to go for except MovieBob knows how to tone it down. Jim almost seems to come off as a troll.

I seriously can't think of anything that this guy brings to the Escapist that isn't already here and done better by one of the other correspondents. He doesn't really get into the deep end of the whole debacle like the Extra Credits guys and his jokes aren't anything that MovieBob or Yahtzee haven't done before in some way. Not to mention I can basically hear his opinions by going into any forum and asking all the really angry guys about the subject. He presents his ideas like they are revolutionary but he really is behind. Please Escapist can we just get rid of him.

 

[Incognita]

He should have signed off with 'England Prevails'

 

[kane.malakos]

I feel like this episode was a lot better than the first. It was more interesting and coherent. I'll certainly keep watching for now.

 

[end_boss]

Even Yahtzee was once just a Youtube guttersnipe,

One that went semi-viral and landed a job with The Escapist because they knew he was the next big thing and had to get to him before anybody else did. The Escapist's readership blew up as a result. With only two episodes of "Fully Ramblomatic," Yahtzee defined himself as a character, created an easily accessible visual style, and garnered attention and respect from gamers worldwide.

and if Jim happens to be wayy different from everything else on this site, is that necessarily bad?

I say give him another couple episodes, see what happens

Because is a lot of cases, The Escapist has a lot of the cream of the crop doing weekly segments. Yahtzee is a huge draw. MovieBob is an encyclopedia of many different forms of entertainment media. The Extra Credits guys are informative, intelligent, well-spoken, and presented as objectively as they can in a mature and dignified manner that treats gamers as a respectable all-ages demographic that don't need to be pandered to. Shamus is experienced, intelligent, does a lot of different things on the site, and is somebody whose opinion is well respected. I never really listed Lisa Foiles as one of my draws to the site, but ever since she's been gone, I kinda miss her. I don't like Unskippable very much, but I've come to terms that a lot of people enjoy them, and frankly I'd rather watch their whole library in marathon fashion before I can bring myself to re-watch a single episode of Jimquisition.

So, when something is wayyy different from everything else on this site, in that everything else holds merits ranging from being enjoyable to being a shining star, while Jimquisition has no redeeming qualities, then yes, that is necessarily a bad thing.