Why feminist gaming discussions confuse and infuriate me: the modern schism of reappropriation

[RJ Dalton]

. . . third wave feminism.

Whenever I hear this term, I immediately think of "Third stage guild navigator."

I don't think your facts are quite correct. However, this being the internet, I shall provide no sources to back up my vague and mostly pointless argument. MWA HA HA HA HA HA!!!

Personally, from an academic perspective, I tend to have a problem with feminism in the same way I have a problem with Marxism, and Psychoanalytic theory as forms of criticism. All too often, people try to force something to fit a specific political or philosophical theory (or whatever the hell Freud was doing; god I can't believe people still use his theories to criticize art and literature) theory - or, in the case of feminist criticism, multiple political theories that change every decade or so.
Then again, I always favored Deconstruction, so what the fuck do I know?

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

These are the two branches of modern, third wave feminism.

What exactly is "third wave" feminism? Is it the empowerment phase?

The definition I've heard the most, and prefer (as always, ask different feminists and you'll get different answers), is that third wave feminism is focused on the diversification of feminism and femininity. It seeks to explore all the various ways that one can be a feminist, trying to focus on individual experience of being a man/woman in a gendered society. In essence, the second wave was an attempt to create a "unified" definition of what the female and male gender role was and the third wave, as a reaction, tries to focus on the individual.

Empowerment, for both men and women, is a big part of this, to dare be the person you want to be instead of the person that cultural gender roles (even the gender roles of second wave feminism) pushes you to be. It also tends to be sex positive and it has been quite active in criticizing stereotypical gender roles in media and entertainment. In essence it is a diversification and problematisation of the feminist ideal.

Which makes Tenmars post above hilarious since he's going on a tangent against what he percieves to b third wave feminism, when it actually isn't. Equal opportunity/treatment were both part of the second wave, that it is still being discussed shows how much time it takes to change cultural and social norms.

 

[ResonanceSD]

These are the two branches of modern, third wave feminism.

What exactly is "third wave" feminism? Is it the empowerment phase?

The definition I've heard the most, and prefer (as always, ask different feminists and you'll get different answers), is that third wave feminism is focused on the diversification of feminism and femininity. It seeks to explore all the various ways that one can be a feminist, trying to focus on individual experience of being a man/woman in a gendered society. In essence, the second wave was an attempt to create a "unified" definition of what the female and male gender role was and the third wave, as a reaction, tries to focus on the individual.

Empowerment, for both men and women, is a big part of this, to dare be the person you want to be instead of the person that cultural gender roles (even the gender roles of second wave feminism) pushes you to be. It also tends to be sex positive and it has been quite active in criticizing stereotypical gender roles in media and entertainment. In essence it is a diversification and problematisation of the feminist ideal.

So..second and third waves are..battling it out? It sounds like they're directly opposed.

 

[zachusaman]

for every skimpy suit gun toting meat jacket theres also a braindead fridge with arms and military connections (see gears of war for the whole ensemble)

 

[ThrobbingEgo]

Who has a problem with Alyx Vance? She's one of the most believably human characters in any video game, let alone as a representation of a woman. I don't think there's a lot to criticize to be levied against her from a feminist perspective.

One of the things that knee-jerk reactionaries don't get about feminism is that when it deals with media, it isn't about the enforcement of rigid ideals. It's about a criticism of patterns, roles, and portrayals of what's possible for women. This ethos is certainly not incompatible with games as art: Wouldn't you be interested in seeing art that better represents who people are and what they can be, instead of always clinging to two dimensional cardboard characters who only seem to exist for someone else's pleasure?

 

[ThrobbingEgo]

for every skimpy suit gun toting meat jacket theres also a braindead fridge with arms and military connections (see gears of war for the whole ensemble)

'Radical feminism' is also concerned with the way men are limited by patriarchy. bell hooks said that although men are not subjected by patriarchy, we do suffer because of the need to be 'superior' to others. Men are expected to embody traits our society values, which includes physical strength, superiority over others, suppression of emotion - and these are also limiting and damaging, though far more profitable than the devalued traits that women have been saddled with.

Feminism is really, in my view, about showing people an escape to limiting gender roles in society. Men are included in the escape from those gender roles.

 

[wizzy555]

One of the things that knee-jerk reactionaries don't get about feminism is that when it deals with media, it isn't about the enforcement of rigid ideals. It's about a criticism of patterns, roles, and portrayals of what's possible for women. This ethos is certainly not incompatible with games as art: Wouldn't you be interested in seeing art that better represents who people are and what they can be, instead of always clinging to two dimensional cardboard characters who only seem to exist for someone else's pleasure?

Except the "trolling" feminists will just pick out one character and focus on that, one character is not a pattern and in a bias free world we would expect some female characters to be weak or have personality flaws (as you would men) example http://www.cracked.com/article_16587_hollywoods-5-saddest-attempts-at-feminism.html. Likewise a movie that fails the Bechdel test is not a bad/sexist movie, a selection of movies that largely fail the Bechdel test demonstrates the bias in the movie landscape.

 

[ThrobbingEgo]

One of the things that knee-jerk reactionaries don't get about feminism is that when it deals with media, it isn't about the enforcement of rigid ideals. It's about a criticism of patterns, roles, and portrayals of what's possible for women. This ethos is certainly not incompatible with games as art: Wouldn't you be interested in seeing art that better represents who people are and what they can be, instead of always clinging to two dimensional cardboard characters who only seem to exist for someone else's pleasure?

Except the "trolling" feminists will just pick out one character and focus on that, one character is not a pattern and in a bias free world we would expect some female characters to be weak or have personality flaws (as you would men) example http://www.cracked.com/article_16587_hollywoods-5-saddest-attempts-at-feminism.html. Likewise a movie that fails the Bechdel test is not a bad/sexist movie, a selection of movies that largely fail the Bechdel test demonstrates the bias in the movie landscape.

I'm not really sure what you're trying to get at. Cracked is a comedy site, not a feminist journal. Meanwhile the bechdel test just tests for the presence of women who interact and I'm not sure why you brought it up...

 

[J. Mazarin]

Obligatory comment: If you can't maintain interest in a game without gratuitous boobs/ass being flung in your face for no other reason than sexual pandering, then the only suitable entertainment for you is a Playboy subscription and a bottle of lotion.

Also, Fiery, try to remember that you're posting on the fucking Escapist. There is absolutely no reason to make your posts so unnecessarily obtuse. Get your point across, and move on.

We're not grading a term paper, here.

 

[wizzy555]

One of the things that knee-jerk reactionaries don't get about feminism is that when it deals with media, it isn't about the enforcement of rigid ideals. It's about a criticism of patterns, roles, and portrayals of what's possible for women. This ethos is certainly not incompatible with games as art: Wouldn't you be interested in seeing art that better represents who people are and what they can be, instead of always clinging to two dimensional cardboard characters who only seem to exist for someone else's pleasure?

Except the "trolling" feminists will just pick out one character and focus on that, one character is not a pattern and in a bias free world we would expect some female characters to be weak or have personality flaws (as you would men) example http://www.cracked.com/article_16587_hollywoods-5-saddest-attempts-at-feminism.html. Likewise a movie that fails the Bechdel test is not a bad/sexist movie, a selection of movies that largely fail the Bechdel test demonstrates the bias in the movie landscape.

I'm not really sure what you're trying to get at. Cracked is a comedy site, not a feminist journal. Meanwhile the bechdel test just tests for the presence of women who interact and I'm not sure why you brought it up...

I know it's a comedy site, however it's an example of the interaction of feminist ideas with popular culture (and possibly explanation for misunderstandings that occur), I could use the example of time magazine picking out Ally McBeal but I imagine less people here would understand that. I bring up the Bechdel test because I have seen examples of "This movie fails the Bechdel test, therefore it is bad/sexist".

 

[742]

the idea that characters should be met with failure or success because of the character. its not about positive/negative, and there are cultural (and maybe biological, but the expression of any innately gender influenced* behaviors are absolutely mediated by the culture, so its really difficult to sort out whats what, and from what ive seen theres a lot more socio-cultural stuff and less biology than you would think). song of ice and fire is a good example: the women in that setting fuck up. a lot. they make bad decisions. a lot. its not too terribly sexist. heres why: they fail because of character flaws(not always their own). they never do things 'because theyre women'-there are times when they do things because theyre mothers, daughters, wives, or to deal with an absurdly sexist society, but there are times that the male characters (who fail just as often, and just as severely, if not more so in some cases.) do plenty of things because theyre fathers, sons, husbands, chivalry intoxicated morons, or straight up sexist fuckers. the women of the setting are shown to be just as competent(or not) in every way(ive only read to book four, maybe the women all become incompetent morons and the men MS's), and, when they somehow do get into a position of power, just as varied in ability as their male counterparts. they dont fail significantly more or less (averaging for the genders of characters and the enormity of the mistakes), and when they do, it is on at least a handful occasions (out of the hundreds of fuckups the characters make in the first four books) because the odds are stacked against them just for being women in a wildly sexist society (on top of all the other reasons the odds are stacked against them). theyre just as moral (or not), on average, as the men in the setting. they do things. they have motivations-not all of which are male.

also theyre well written. i cannot fucking stress that part enough.

*i know its essentialist and binary genders are bullshit but im going for accessibility here and ive not slept in far too long so my explanation would be totally incoherent.

 

[Mr_Spanky]

I think its very easy to get tied up in knots over this issue. Distingushing between this or that type of femminist philosophy.

I kind of agree and also disagree (lol?) with both of these. Neither is an all encompassing rule - and as such it would a mistake to label them as "philoshopy 1" and "philosphy 2"

On 1):
It is true that if you were to take a stereotypical female there would be certain traits (and im not going into which ones) there that would not appear in a stereotypical male. But of course people are an amalgm of both male AND female traits based on genetics, upbringing etc. and so this argument doesnt hold true for "real" people.

On 2) this is true - some traits can be considered "good" and some "bad" but the problem with this is we are assuming everyone has the same interpretation of good and bad traits. Which is not the case. Everyones going to have their own idea about that.

What I find deeply frustrating about all of these conversations is that people are very free and easy with the word feminist - to the extent that it can take on multiple forms depending on your own personal beliefs. In that sense it would a good idea to be able to distinguish between "that one" and "the other one". Quite how you do that though I have no idea as everyone will always use whatever words you say to mean whatever they want. Youd probably need a lawyer so good luck with that

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

So..second and third waves are..battling it out? It sounds like they're directly opposed.

In some areas, certainly. Basics like equal opportunity, equal treatment etc. are still the same. The difference is really that whereas Second Wave tended to focus on a singular definition of what was "correct" feminism, third wave is more diverse and forsakes the monolithic and potentially equally oppressing idea of "correct" feminism for more individual interpretation and a more integrated understanding of how things like ethnicity, religion etc. also influence what it means to belong to either gender.

It is not really a battle though as much as it is a development. Very few, if any, would proclaim today to be second wave but not third wave feminists, it should be considered an evolution instead of a schism within feminism. It could be compared to Marx idea of the thesis and anti-thesis that will eventually lead to a synthesis. If second wave was the thesis, then third wave is the anti-thesis and it supposedly isn't until the (eventual) fourth wave that we'll see where it all really ended up.

 

[Pearwood]

Also, Fiery, try to remember that you're posting on the fucking Escapist. There is absolutely no reason to make your posts so unnecessarily obtuse. Get your point across, and move on.

I'm 100% in favour of scaring away morons with big words. Not sure it'll work but if it does this thread might not turn into a total disaster.

As for the topic itself I think the biggest problem with online feminist discussions is that people assume a conversation about stereotypical treatment of women can just be answered by "Well men are stereotyped too". That doesn't make it better. If the stereotyping of men annoys you to such an extent that you're willing to write off valid arguments solely on that then you should be fully behind a movement that calls for better character design. Calling for better writing of female characters leads to better writing of male characters. Why? Can you imagine a game developer hiring a proper writer to only do the female characters and then getting told to go home so they can copy paste some generic male characters in?

 

[theultimateend]

I am simply not sexist. I am able to enjoy well made games without drawing conclusions about the girl's skimping clothing. I... don't think I'll ever give a shit about this argument.

These are the two branches of modern, third wave feminism.

"Third wave feminism", phrases like that are so weird to me. I don't think I could put the reasons in words.

I like you .

That's all I got.

Everytime I own a game that pops up in a rant about gender equality (like soul calibur) I have to go back.

Oh...I guess her tits really are all over the place.

I guess.

Personally I played her because her sword is flipping amazing...it turns into a freaking blade chain...

Anywho, don't want to go into any of the serious people posts. But we don't have a "Like" button here, so quoting you and babbling is my best option.

 

[wizzy555]

Also, Fiery, try to remember that you're posting on the fucking Escapist. There is absolutely no reason to make your posts so unnecessarily obtuse. Get your point across, and move on.

I'm 100% in favour of scaring away morons with big words. Not sure it'll work but if it does this thread might not turn into a total disaster.

As for the topic itself I think the biggest problem with online feminist discussions is that people assume a conversation about stereotypical treatment of women can just be answered by "Well men are stereotyped too". That doesn't make it better. If the stereotyping of men annoys you to such an extent that you're willing to write off valid arguments solely on that then you should be fully behind a movement that calls for better character design. Calling for better writing of female characters leads to better writing of male characters. Why? Can you imagine a game developer hiring a proper writer to only do the female characters and then getting told to go home so they can copy paste some generic male characters in?

But that's an badly structured argument. You are giving special consideration to women instead of just saying, game characters suck they need improving. Unless you mean that women have it disproportionately bad.

If you are pulling out feminist arguments then there's the implicit assumption that you are seeing a sexist bias in action that you want to eliminate. The response "well men are stereotyped too" is a response to the perception of bias. If there is no bias you can't turn every problem into a gender issue for sake of attention.

 

[theblindedhunter]

Arguments about feminism often give me the same sensation as some arguments about what is a good or bad game do that, I think, can be explained as so: we see something wrong, we know something is wrong, yet it is much more difficult to actually put one's finger on it and articulate what is amiss - at least for the community on the whole. The result is people clinging to various arguments that sort of fit, different ones at different times, because they aren't entirely inaccurate even if they don't totally fit their views.
It is worsened because figuring these things out really benefits from communication and cooperation in the community, which has largely become so easily offended by the smallest hints of feminism (or "feminism") that exactly nothing is ever figured out.

 

[Pearwood]

Unless you mean that women have it disproportionately bad.

Well I do think that, a bland character is hardly as offensive as someone with tits bigger than her head who wears little more than carefully placed belts but that wasn't my point. My point was that using that argument sounds a bit like saying "I'm against this call for better writing because writing in video games is bad". Even if you completely disagree with feminist philosophy I don't see why you'd fight a demand to improve the quality of writing in games you admit have shit writing. Even if it does focus exclusively on female characters, which I already explained why I don't think it would, that's still a lot of improvement in a hobby you obviously like or you wouldn't be on this forum.

Really that's the reason I'm so strongly for this movement, you can ignore all the gender politics if that stuff bothers you but if gaming is a hobby you really enjoy then I can't understand what possible reason you could have to not support a call for better writing.

I have a question from a country, that doesn't give a crap about female rights, because our females do not care: Why do you care, huh?

Because women can voice their opinions without being arrested here.