Tropes vs Women SECOND VIDEO - "Damsel in Distress: Part 2"

[Erttheking]

I still think the solution to this is easier than people give it credit for. Don't write female characters. Write Human beings. Come up with a person's personality, character traits, backstory etc before you put things like gender in, unless their gender directly ties into their character arc. Gender IS a part of who we are, but it doesn't define us. Heck, it's pretty easy to make a balanced cast of genders in my opinion.

http://s3.photobucket.com/user/neko-hime-cfi/media/FROMASHES2-1.png.html?filters[user]=3916024&filters[recent]=1&filters[publicOnly]=1&sort=1&o=41

 

[aguspal]

it seems once again the comments have been disabled on this new video too.

So the ONE interesting part is removed?

Thats it, I officially have nothing to do with this random woman. I thougt she might had a chance. But I guess not.

Before this series she actually had comments+ratings enabled on all her videos and she pretty much got swamped by people who either disagreed with her stuff, or were violently trolled/flamed the hell out her (because they disagreed with her stuff, why else)...plus the ratings didn't paint a good picture either. Overall the reaction was negative.

Her response to that was...you guessed it, disabling both comments and ratings on all past videos and every video since then lol. A lot of people won't even give the time of day to sit through a Youtube video that has comments/ratings disabled beacuse that is typically the first telltale sign that the video is either full of bullshit or trying to waste the viewer's time.
And while Anita certainly isn't going for that (although the first video did have it's share of bullshit), she isn't gaining herself any plus points either by showing that her work can't stand against public scrutiny and she can't handle the reactions. Her loss in the end.


I guess overall it's a good thing because she no longer has a pool of troll/flame comments from randoms on the internet to show herself being "victimized", she did a pretty clever job to make that work in her favor last time.

If the video has so many negative reactions, there must be a reason for it..I dont like people that hide and dont confront their crap.

 

[lord.jeff]

Over all a pretty good video, especially the last five minutes as she takes a shit on games for relying to much on violence, something I very much agree with. Though I had to stop and laugh as she at one point mentions in recent game and her next example is Medievil 2 a game that is 13 years old, and her female specific warning does start to paint her as that I don't care about males femnazi persona, why would you even make a female specific content warning?

 

[Phasmal]

I thought this one was better than the first.
Looking forward to the rest.
People will still not like it, and cause shitstorms.
So I'm keeping it short, I think I've made my views on these topics clear before.

 

[Erttheking]

I thought this one was better than the first.
Looking forward to the rest.
People will still not like it, and cause shitstorms.
So I'm keeping it short, I think I've made my views on these topics clear before.

Eh, I personally still find them kinda bland. They just feel like lists half of the time.

 

[Phasmal]

I thought this one was better than the first.
Looking forward to the rest.
People will still not like it, and cause shitstorms.
So I'm keeping it short, I think I've made my views on these topics clear before.

Eh, I personally still find them kinda bland. They just feel like lists half of the time.

It may not be to your personal taste but I feel it gets the job done.

 

[Erttheking]

I thought this one was better than the first.
Looking forward to the rest.
People will still not like it, and cause shitstorms.
So I'm keeping it short, I think I've made my views on these topics clear before.

Eh, I personally still find them kinda bland. They just feel like lists half of the time.

It may not be to your personal taste but I feel it gets the job done.

I always thought that Jim's videos did a better job of addressing sexism, because they got involved with real issues with the industry and addressed certain arguments and countered them. Anita just seems to be giving an example of a single trope.

 

[Phasmal]

I thought this one was better than the first.
Looking forward to the rest.
People will still not like it, and cause shitstorms.
So I'm keeping it short, I think I've made my views on these topics clear before.

Eh, I personally still find them kinda bland. They just feel like lists half of the time.

It may not be to your personal taste but I feel it gets the job done.

I always thought that Jim's videos did a better job of addressing sexism, because they got involved with real issues with the industry and addressed certain arguments and countered them. Anita just seems to be giving an example of a single trope.

Um, of course. She's doing a series on tropes.
If you ask me, there's no one right way to discuss these things. I am happy to have both Jim and Anita's videos existing.
I think there are problems with the industry and problems with the community, many of which aren't going away any time soon, but it's good to be aware of them.

Anyway, I'm not getting sucked into the quicksand of threads like these. Phasmal out!

 

[votemarvel]

I thought this video was much better than the first. She cut down on using 'big words' for the sake of it and took the time to look at the issue from the opposite side.

The increase in quality of this segment will bring me back for the third.

 

[taciturnCandid]

I love how when it comes to the part about how context matters, she just handwaves it and says it doesn't matter.

Context is key to the situation and is why it isn't what she says it is. She uses these key phrases to try to prove her point that women have no agency in videos, but she doesn't take into point the context.

In fact, a lot of it is really sexist in stating that because it happens to women it is somehow worse.

This is exactly why the tropes happen. Players are convinced by society that women are of a higher value and are needed of protecting. Violence against women is the worst thing ever because something about power+privilege+peanut butter.

But if these tropes are to end, it will be by showing that women aren't special beings and that depictions of violence against them like violence against men in media are treated equally. It is our own sexism that drives these tropes and she isn't addressing them by herself putting women on a pedestal.

In fact, most of these tropes are there for the point of empathy. Not to dehumanize or objectify women, but to inspire the player to act. Most players see violence done to a woman and they react because they depict it as worse than violence against men. Most players will react to a female being kidnapped and held hostage because they see her as valuable enough to pursue through adversity.

The reason why this trope is used less with men is because they have to establish a good relationship and an emotional value to the player of a man for them to want to be motivated to save them. A random man being kidnapped most gamers will shrug and not feel motivated to pursue. That is, unless the player has spent enough time to learn to care about the male.

I can use an example from one of the D&D games I hosted.

They were at a party and a man from a nearby town was being sacrificed. They didn't bat an eye despite me trying to convince them to give a shit. But as soon as I had the bad guys drag out a woman to sacrifice they leap into action.

The reason why the woman in the refrigerator and the put her out of her misery tropes work is because they are great at emotionally motivating the player. These both horrify the player and make them angry at the antagonist. They are useful because players see women as valuable.

The thought process is usually that the bad guy is really an awful thing and needs to be stopped or to look at themselves and question if what they have done is right all along.

The main thing to remember is that games are an interactive experience and the one who matters the most is the player. All these things are done to motivate the player or to manipulate them emotionally. Players will go to great lengths to protect women and are put off by depictions of violence against women.

This is why most every enemy you encounter is male. Males are seen as disposable and violence against them is depicted as comical or justified. This works because outside of the hero, players don't empathize with male characters. They learn to care about the hero through experiences and development of the character. Players have to be taught to care about male characters while they automatically care about the female characters.

I also object in how the borderlands games were used as examples because they are examples of games with strong female agency and well developed female characters. Not only that, but it features female heroes who are not sexualized or treated differently than male heroes despite them being able to talk.

Angel is used as a damsel in distress because the characters care about her because she carries over from the first game. In the end she ends up defying her captor and is one of the main reasons why the player is able to succeed. Meanwhile the firehawk was taken prisoner not because she was a woman, but because she is one of the most powerful people in the universe. If the player hesitates in finishing off the main boss, she will and do it without sadness or regret. Angel and firehawk are valued because of the awesome power they have and how much influence they are able to have. They may be held captive, but they are certainly not depicted as weak or helpless.

 

[Mcupobob]

So whats her point? That video games reinforce the idea of sexism and violence?

First time watching her series, I find her views more toxic towards fighting sexism than helpful. I do somewhat agree with her the damsel in distress trope is over-played or underdeveloped. My little cousin watches this Barbie movies were the role is reversed were the women has to save the man. It all about a power fantasy. However I don't agree that this women(or men) are being viewed as objects, we've all had the occasionally day-dream were we step-up and save our loved ones and become hero's in their eyes. Thats the psychology behind it saving someones life that you care about. So in the end I find the trope to be more offensive because its lazy writing rather than it's sexist.

As for the bit about women turning into monsters and ask to be killed. That trope doesn't target women specifically.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ICannotSelfTerminate?from=Main.KillMe

It's all about someone or anyone you care about(Or sometimes not) asking you to end their pain or prevent them from becoming a monster. Such as in the case as someone being bitten and about to turn into a zombie. So again I don't see her point, as this trope doesn't target women specifically or even at all.

After all that the only thing I'm getting from this video is that she thinks video games are just to violent and we should be playing over the moon instead. I don't know I'm just glad I didn't give her any money.

 

[MeTheMe]

I'll say about this one as I said about the last, I don't agree with everything she says, but she makes some points, and actually starts a conversation we can have without killing each other. Well, a conversation we should be able to have without killing each other. She and MovieBob both say games don't exist in a vacuum, and it's true, so a trend is a trend for a reason, and I think we should at least be able to talk about it, even if we disagree on it. I kind of like some tropes, but it's true they're over used. I don't think she's saying we need to be rid of all these tropes, but that their pervasive use in so much media is a symptom of something. We should at least hear her out and argue our points in a civilized manner.

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Snip

Some good stuff in there.

She also looks at the relationship between story and gameplay in(what I would say was) a backwards way. She says that stories are a-certain-way because developers trap themselves by focusing on certain game mechanics(namely combat). In reality, combat and space traversal are what games actually do well(at least for now)... So when stories focus on "getting to this place" or "killing this creature/person" it's because that's the kind of narrative that supports what the medium is good at. The motivations are what they are, I think... for the kinds of reasons you outlined.

 

[Lucane]

"Video removed due to violating Youtube's terms of service"

Why?

Didn't Nintendo start getting money for X or Y type of content in videos on Youtube mean they get a cut or all of the profits from ad revenue? a good amount of her clips are from games on those systems. Otherwise I can't even guess as to why they did that.

 

[MoeMints]

At 12 minutes in, I don't agree with any of her arguments at all.
She completely ignores male examples in the "Euthanized damsel" when corruption and infection is commonly inflicted on powerful males as well. In fact, many RPGs like Live a Live and Final Fantasy VII revolve around it.

That and she ignores context to make her point better.

- In Asura's Wrath, your wife and daughter are relatively normal in comparison to you and the other deities.
It would be actually worse and nonsensical if they were just as competent as you.

- What was she expecting in Pandora's Tower and Prey? They're loved ones who has absolutely no way of recovery and will suffer a slow death as they are now. Would you rather have them be fine through Deus Ex Machina BS or they decide themselves to be withering monsters?

Not everything has to be deep and "fair" for no reason but false equality.

- In Resident Evil 4 and 5, she ignores the fact women have been very competent in the series, with Jill being a significant case. By the way, its TOTALLY not just crappy writing, oh no.

- I'm starting to think she hasn't played Hotline Miami herself if she thinks anyone in that game is glorified.

I don't care if she gave a limp counter-balance to her argument saying "developers, players, and writers aren't sexist in themselves." She's still brings it back up to a bias through saying male on female violence in itself sets cultural practices.
The Darkness examples really sickens me as she simplifies Jackie's loss as "OH NO I LOST MY WOMAN, MUST KILL EVERYTHING."

 

[SwagLordYoloson]

I don't get who she targets her videos too, they are boring as hell. No kid is going to watch it and learn, they are going to at best look at the images and try to imagine they are doing something fun.

 

[Tono Makt]

Hmm... She has some points. The "wife death, daughter kidnapped" section was pretty telling of just how tired these tropes are, and how desperately the game industry needs a jolt of creativity.

I'm thinking a version of God of War that stars Boudicca getting revenge on the Romans... for the... rape of her daughters hmm...
Dang it, even history can't give me a badass female protagonist that doesn't involve other women being victimized as a motivation!

Not many, anyway. Women don't tend to do the kinds of things that men write histories about, and until very recently history was written almost exclusively by men, so... yeah. And if you want to see how people react to something more of a non-victimized, somewhat more feminine heroine, just look to the reaction that has greeted Pixar's "Brave".

It's sad, but not unexpected. Sigh.

 

[Elamdri]

Her new series is a marked improvement over her older videos in terms of production value and quality of analysis, but she's still got a few problems with her arguments and presentation.

She does a much better job I think compared to her older videos of giving examples rather than opinions. I thought her first video did a decent job of looking at the trope's history and the second video on the evolution of the trope in modern times.

She does have a problem however with bringing in her own asides to the argument, and a lot of times they're distract and almost always seemed forced, which is weird. She chews the scenery sometimes in a way that would make Jeremy Irons jealous.

She also has a bad habit of using worlds like "clearly" to make a point seem stronger than it really is.

I was disappointed (although not surprised) that she didn't talk about the negative implication of the Damsel in Distress: Male Disposability.

Male disposability arises out of a historical context that a successful tribe of people needed to make sure that it protected it's women, because they learned very quickly that a tribe with not enough women did not survive. That viewpoint that women are inherently valuable and men are not has survived to this day, and is prevalent throughout society. While modern society is still in many ways unbalanced in a way that disfavors women, in many ways it is also unbalanced towards men, due to the fact that men are still viewed as inherently less valuable than women.

The Damsel in Distress trope and the reason that there are few examples of the Dude in Distress counter-trope is because of that view of women=valuable and men=disposable.

 

[Vegan_Doodler]

I dislike the video for a few reasons.
Anita basically shows us a bunch of stuff that she has already deemed 'bad' with out actually proving that they are. She hasn't
She has once again tactfully left out, made up, or lied about bits of information to prop up her argument.
This 'well researched' video was basically a reading of wikapidia and TVtropes pages.

But the thing that pisses me off the most is the fact that just because I disagree with Anita and dislike the video, according to some that means that I'm a misogynistic, chauvinistic pig, who just wants to stamp out intelligent discussion and keep gaming as a 'boy's club'. Because I disagree with her my input is going to be immediately disregarded because I'm just another stupid man.

I welcome anyone up for a good, civil exchange of ideas. Anyone who's going to call people names because someone had the audacity to disagree, Go forth and multiply.

Oh look, the trolls inundated the new episode with inappropriate contents/copyright claims and managed to get the video taken down.

Who is it who's trying to stifle discussion again?

Actually she disabled the comments before hand. So I guess shes the one trying to stifle discussion.

 

[The Artificially Prolonged]

It was better than the last one, I managed to get all the way through this one. I still not seeing the point she is trying to make beyond here is trope, here it is again, here it is mixed in with another trope and here again with a twist. We already know that damsel tropes are over used in videogame stories to the point of ridiculousness, we don't need 15 minutes of more examples.

Rather than list so many examples with out of context examples of violence perhaps it would have been better to look at a few examples in depth and discuss the valid points of using the tropes within the context of the narrative and character dynamics while highlighting negative or poorly done aspects of the the damsel trope that these display and offer ways at which this could have been better handled to better represent both the male and female characters. Granted she does point some good examples but again does not give much context for why the likes To The Moon and Dear Esther better represent male and female relationships beyond that they don't end in violence. Still kudos for giving a shout to To The Moon, that game's story is amazing.

One point I have to disagree strongly with is her point that violence against women depicted in a piece of fiction must always take in to account the social and psychological aspects of using such a plot point to ensure that it is not pushing a misogynists ideal onto people in real life and perpetuating real life violence against women. For a start fiction is fiction, and as such is already divorced from reality by default. So unless it actually explicitly tells it's reader/viewer that beating women is okay and you should do it, saying that it promotes violence against women is stretching it a bit. Secondly such thinking would stifle any writer's freedom to express their art in the way they intend. Thirdly it is virtually impossible for any man, woman or child to be able to fathom how a piece of fiction will impact on the real world beyond their own scope and perception of the world around them. Likely if they tried to see the impact through the eyes of everyone, the impact it does or doesn't have will likely be nothing like what the author imagined to begin with.

One final point I really think it does the this series great harm that Anita's tone strongly suggest she hs already made up her mind up on the subject matter at the start of the video. It conveys that she is just there passing judgement on an entire collection of media/art and its audience rather than trying to facilitate discussion on where this media falls short and how it can be improved.