The Most Dangerous Woman in Videogames - Anita Sarkeesian

[AdagioBoognish]

Which I'd be more inclined to blame on the jerks in those circlejerks than on her. I just don't really understand the backlash against her opinions. As a white guy, what do I lose if a bunch of women hold feminist discussions and host a video series? Girls might eventually make games that feature their ideal protagonist? Some day women might get paid the same wages as a man when working the same job? I would understand the negative outbursts if there was some threat against men, but so far nothing really warrants the posts telling her to eat shit.

To a certain degree that's true, but I think your post is actually pretty indicative of why I'd say she's doing harm. Your post is associating the issue of women in games with her, as if they're part and parcel. She's been turned into the voice of the issue and that, not that the issue is being discussed, is the problem a lot of people have.

Women in games is an important issue that deserved to be talked about, but if you want to talk about it and someone in discussion agrees with her? The discussion is going to melt down, because she's done such a good job of associating anyone who disagrees with her with the trolls and assholes that attacked her. By painting all opposition to her as opposition to solving the issue, she implicitly makes it appear as though her side is the only side wanting to deal with it. Polarizing a nuanced issue destroys discussion.

Before Anita showed up, people did roll their eyes at DoA, they complained about all the samey brown-haired rugged male heroes, they celebrated heroines like Jade from Beyond Good & Evil, and they groaned at the overuse of captured damsels. And most important of all they could discuss the issues without being thrown into one of two camps.

I can agree with that. One problem I have with my room mates, two girls who take a hard stance on feminist issues, is that their strategy for creating discussion is using "somewhat inflammatory statements to bring attention to the problem". They feel, and I don't think they created this tactic, that if you don't use statements to more or less make people angry, then the people you're trying to convince will just brush you off. It draws a line in the sand at the very start of the conversation and I spend most of my time on the defensive, because with them generalizing and polarizing the issue it makes me feel like a part of the problem even though I agree with their core ideas.

I think that Anita, and any people with her level of publicity, should set themselves open to constructive debate. You're right that trying to delegitimize all dissenting opinions won't do any good.

I wasn't trying to put her up as a voice of a movement in my first post though, I'm just sincerely surprised at a lot of the disgusting comments people are throwing out there. I got linked to a 4chan thread and was blown away by the extreme level of disrespect people are showing before I wrote my first comment. With the amount of threats, demonizing, and hateful remarks being directed towards her, I wonder if Anita is very aware of any real arguments against her.

Keep in mind I'm fairly new to her and what she's brought to this whole debate so, like many people, I'm coming into this with a fresh perspective.

 

[Rakschas]

this thing blew up to 21 pages. ive read only some of it and i dare say without having read it all that somewhere along the line it deviated from the issue at hand.

a videogame is not a well sponsored art project that sells millions of copies by chance, its a commercial product. and the people that invest into it have a legitimate interest in having their money returned. for that purpose there is only so much innovation that happens at a time or sometimes none.
if she and her sisterhood of self appointed media experts feel that the world is ready for this new era of female game characters, by all means she should just go through the channels everyone else has to go through to pitch their idea to the people who spend the money that is intrusted to them by their investors into it.
if these feminist ideas make it through and the result is favourable so be it.

but i dare say the reason theyve hardly ever tried is that despite how they say that the world is ready for it and the time is now and all that, that is neither the case nor the issue. its probably not a question of the right time and whos ready for what. its probably the idea that sucks, be it yesterday, today or tomorrow. and they know it.

 

[wulf3n]

It's funny how drastically ones opinions can change in a meager 2 years.

I came across a quote [http://gameoverthinker.blogspot.com.au/2011/04/extra-credits-does-other-m.html] that made me remember why I started watching MovieBob in the first place.

Why is "Extra Credits" the best gaming show on the web? Because when THEY make the Other M episode, they spend 99% of it on things like narrative mechanics and localization, maybe 1% or less on percieved socio/political "messages"/issues that simply aren't really there and ZERO percent of it on dime-store analysis of the alleged "cultural misogyny" of a foriegn culture they don't belong to.

 

[Aardvaarkman]

His point was: If you don't like it or have a problem with it, don't support/buy it.

How is that supposed to work?

We're only allowed to buy creative works that we know are perfect and don't have any problems, beforehand? If we knew that in advance, then what would be the point of buying it, seeing as we already know what happens?

There is no perfect creation. Anything we buy is going to have deficiencies, no matter how much we enjoy them. Let me know when you've found this perfect object that has no flaws.

 

[Aardvaarkman]

1. The game is rated M for mature. Meaning that at least in the USA someone over 17 had to of bought the game.

But we know that in reality, that isn't how it works. There are tons of kids under 17 playing this game. And even being 17 (or 30) is not a guarantee of maturity.

3. You are making the presupposition that both strip clubs and prostitution is bad and that the sexual relations between man and women in what is being sold as a service is somehow a cynical view to be equal to that of sex toys. I disagree.

No, I am not. What I'm saying is that strip clubs have a policy of "no touching" and typically, women who work in strip clubs are not working there as prostitutes. However, GTAV makes every single stripper available to you for sex, if you touch them enough. Not a very "mature" depiction of seduction right there. Keep feeling them up, and you are guaranteed sex.

Where did I say that stripping or prostitution is bad?

5. In the same argument that does playing violent video games make an individual violent? No. Simply the act of playing video games be the content of violent or of a sexual nature does not in itself create a mindset to think of either gender to be less than a person. The USA has gone through this argument to which the video game industry actually was supported by the Supreme Court that video games are protected free speech.

Yes, it's similar, but I'm not arguing that video games cause violence or sexism, simply that they may affect attitudes towards them. I never said they should be banned or that free speech is not applicable.

See your argument up-thread about the rating of games. If there was no question of the influence of content, then why is it rated at all? And, this being a gaming site, I think we've all experienced or have known people who have experienced "games that changed their lives" - so why is it implausible that a game could change somebody negatively?

Honestly I find it quite insulting that you actually are trying to appeal to the emotional level in which you actually focus on prepubescent boys and treat them as if they were somehow did not possess the intelligence to discern fantasy from reality.

Except I did not say that. I never even mentioned "prepubescent boys" - I mentioned pubescent boys, which can include (although it is increasingly rare) 17 year-olds.

They certainly know that they are playing a game. But why would you say that a game does not have the power to influence them, just as a piece of literature or music does? If anything, you're insulting gaming by saying that it is impotent and impossible to have an impact on people.

When you are dealing with subjects like sexism and violence there are not simple solutions where you can point to one object and then destroy it and bring peace to the land. It is often rooted in the individual social interactions both positive and negative and connection a person has towards ones community, religion, and family.

Indeed. And games are increasingly a part of that landscape. For many people, gaming is their community and is a stronger influence than any of the other factors you mention.

 

[Artemicion]

On the Samus thing: I don't think the issue is that Samus is wearing a bikini. I think the issue is more that she can't be counted as "a good female character", since she's not really a character at all.

That is an example of a good argument, but not Sarkeesian's argument. Sarkeesian's argument is that she's wearing nothing but a bikini under her armor, and therefore it's sexist. That's not an exaggeration, that's really her argument.

Wait, how is a woman wearing a bikini "expressing her sexuality" - and what is it that you feel that bikini-wearers are trying to express? I always thought it was about going swimming or going to the beach.

Does a man wearing Speedos say something about his sexuality? If so, what?

Go ahead and take a look at the preferred styles of bikini that you'll most often see being worn - the curves, angles, and cuts are designed to show off the body's form, not just exist as clothing for swimming. There are different models made that show more and show less, from modest one-pieces that cover the entire torso neck-down to the spaghetti-strap Miami beach basically-nothing two piece. Other than for personal comfort reasons (a la chafing) and professional swimmers (whom traditionally adopt the one piece models), there's one reason to prefer the skimpy model over the more modest one: expression of identity and sexuality. And it's not like it's saying "look at me, you want to have sex with me" - sexuality is an incredibly broad part of expression that couldn't possibly be covered in a single post or a even a dedicated topic, and it can be expressed hundreds of ways for hundreds of different reasons - but it's still part of sexuality.

A man wearing a Speedo falls under the same general principles because, surprise, both genders are human. I'm a bit distraught as to why you brought up the Speedo argument however. We're talking about women here, and specifically women wearing tightly-fitting and obviously sex-appeal-drenched clothing. Bringing up a guy wearing a Speedo strongly suggests that you knew exactly what I was talking about and didn't require my explanation because it's essentially the same argument - leading me to wonder why you bothered responding if you were just going to play devil's advocate.

 

[oZode]

Her face looks artificial as hell. I swear, it's kinda creeping me out. Is she a robot?

 

[Aardvaarkman]

Indeed. And games are increasingly a part of that landscape. For many people, gaming is their community and is a stronger influence than any of the other factors you mention.

You really need to stop asserting your opinion as fact. You realize that what you are saying simply isn't true and there is no scientific basis to which you are making your claims upon.

Sure, this might not be a scientific fact, but I do know plenty of people for whom gaming is their primarily social activity and definitely outweighs religion, family, or other social bonds. I'm pretty sure that we could find a good number of Escapist posters who would agree with that.

You are again asserting your opinion as fact and once again making another assumption on the maturity of individuals that you are posing yourself as some sort of authority of who should or should not be able to consume such product.

Except I'm not. When did I say that I should be an authority to judge who should consume products? I was simply pointing out the fact that people outside of the age ratings are playing these games. I've seen it happen. I'm not passing moral judgment on that - just reporting it.

Which is exactly some people would act negatively to it because you are trying to control people and content that they have the freedom and liberty to consumer where it is none of your business.

How am I trying to control people or their freedom? I never once mentioned anything that would suggest that games should be restricted or that freedom of speech should be curtailed.

 

[Aardvaarkman]

There are different models made that show more and show less, from modest one-pieces that cover the entire torso neck-down to the spaghetti-strap Miami beach basically-nothing two piece.

A one-piece swimsuit is not a bikini, by definition. The term refers explicitly to a two-piece swimsuit.

Other than for personal comfort reasons (a la chafing) and professional swimmers (whom traditionally adopt the one piece models), there's one reason to prefer the skimpy model over the more modest one: expression of identity and sexuality. And it's not like it's saying "look at me, you want to have sex with me" - sexuality is an incredibly broad part of expression that couldn't possibly be covered in a single post or a even a dedicated topic, and it can be expressed hundreds of ways for hundreds of different reasons - but it's still part of sexuality.

So, other than revealing a lot of skin, what does it express about sexuality? Perhaps she is trying to attract other women?

I really don't see what a bikini specifically says about sexuality - such as how the woman likes her sex. Does she like it soft, or hard? Does she like BDSM? A bikini says practically nothing useful about her sexuality. All it says it she likes to expose skin. She might even be asexual, and is just wearing the bikini to get maximum sun coverage for her tan.

You said it yourself - sexuality is very complicated, and the mere wearing of a bikini doesn't express anything of significant meaning with regards to sexuality.

 

[Hazy]

Her face looks artificial as hell. I swear, it's kinda creeping me out. Is she a robot?

"Beep boop, give me money, meatba- I mean misogynists."