Women as Reward
Cope49
Banned
Sultry phone calls for people who preordered the new Tekken tag? That's pretty fucking sad.
Thoughts..
This discussion has been closed.
Cope49
Banned
Sultry phone calls for people who preordered the new Tekken tag? That's pretty fucking sad.
Thoughts..
Comments
opens thread
sees Anita
interest gone
Feminist bullshit. I love women and men as reward for my hard work.
Too long didn't watch.
Oh come on! At least view it.
Fuck. I was debating whether or not to get more alcohol or not... Seeing this, I have to brb.
enter link description here
Oh..
Fine be that way . Doesn't make her any less right.
LOL sadly, society sees women as nothing but objects to be obtained and used. Women see themselves as nothing but servants to men.
Believe it or not, apparently this was written by a woman. And women have absolutely been agreeing with this. How is this acceptable? Would men just come out and say it? Will they just come out and say, worship me and my penis, because they rule society.
I hate being a woman. I hate that I'm supposed to be a reward for some person.
I'm not a femnazi, I loosely call myself a feminist, but can anyone prove me wrong that women are only objects to society now? I've yet to have ever felt like anything else to the world than an object for sex for someone to use.
ANITA no no nooo
enter link description here
As for my opinion ^ Only a game don't like it don't buy it there is a hundred different games that don't do this vote with your wallet sales will always determine what game companies do.
If they did that with guys I wouldn't be triggered I just buy a different game tbh I like freedom for game companies to make the game they want without censorship like Anita is trying to bring in
I have more a problem with anita getting paid hundreds of thousands to make these terrible videos to highlight small issues with video games with the global problem true issues with sexism I'll send her over to Saudi Arabia for a week to see true problems with sexism
According to this video: Women as rewards - "When women (or more often women's bodies) are employed as rewards for player actions in video games. The trope frames female bodies as collectible, as tractable, or as consumable, and positions women as status symbols designed to validate the masculinity of presumed straight male players."
Pretty much a complete fabrication (with exception to the consumable aspect, which isn't a problem at all). Nothing in this video even touches on that claim. Just because characters have been sexualized in various sources of media doesn't mean there is some sort of misogynistic agenda behind it. Sexualizing females in games/ other sources of media has nothing to do with painting women as objects, nor is it a tool to further self masculinity.
Really I think that numbers 1, 2, 7, 8, 13, and 14 are good advice for anyone, male or female, in a relationship.
You did say that a woman wrote that, not a man.
If you live in a first world country you're not supposed to be anything other than what you want to be. If you want to be a reward for someone you are entitled to take that route in life. If you don't you can take classes, or enter a field, and work for a living just like everyone else. No, the wage gap doesn't actually exist, so you'll earn the same amount of money as anyone else and be eligible for the same tenures and benefits, etc. Marriage isn't a requirement, it's a choice.
You can purchase anything you want if you have the money, join the military, vote, hold any career you are eligible to hold, go to college, practice any religion you wish, drive a car, go on vacation where ever you want, etc. None of these things require you to have the permission of a slave driving man. You don't have to have sex with anyone you don't want to, because having sex isn't a societal requirement upheld by the law. You can do whatever you want, you can even use men for sex if you want, because you want to. Do whatever you want, you're a person, not an object. Just the same as everyone in the first world.
I'm pretty sure that witcher 3 bit in the intro had nothing to do with the girl being a reward. It just looked like a regular sex scene to me.
Spot on
Alright, I'm back - I actually don't have the vehement disregard for Sarkeesian that a lot of people do, though I generalliy don't agree with her. From what I've gathered, she considers all sexual objectification, and in turn non-committed sexual pleasure, to be inherently problematic. It is not inherently problematic - it depends on the situation. I don't consider Dead or Alive to be anything to complain about for objectifying women because it's effectively soft core pornography. I don't say that to dismiss it, but rather that sexual titilation isn't something 'creeping' into the game, it's one of the pillars of its design. There is no agency being denied to these women, simply because they don't exist outside of the game.
Agree or disagree with the rest, but I'd say it's safe to say around 7:40 she ran off the rails.
One area where I did agree with her, on her main video, was when she was talking about some of the alternative costumes for characters in Resident Evil. No matter how high ranking, no matter how skilled or talented the character is, they are taken out of the flow of the story to be dressed in something inappropriate to the narrative for the viewing pleasure of the gamer. It is not a character with whom the character has developped an understand and relationship with, as in a well-written date simulator, nor is it in the context of a relationship between two characters. Martha Nussbaum makes a similar critique of Playboy's Women of the Ivy League edition, where womens' accomplishments as disregarded in themselves, but instead used to more valuable - like driving a BMW versus a Toyota. (I should note Sarkeesian mentions Nussbaum in other video - though Sarkeesian completely misses the point. Nussbaum was first defining what constituted objectification, then asking the question of whether it is or is not bad; Sarkeesian just took the definition and assumed it was bad all the time.)
If you want to talk about the effect that might have on how males treat women in the real world (if there is any), that's a matter of media literacy - the same way little little kids need to understand there's a differnece between killing people in video games and killing people in the real world. That's an extreme example, but the point is that people need to be aware that sources of pleasure from media and sources of pleasure in real life are not quite the same and that, more importantly, the rights of the other person apply to real people - not to video games. That sounds obvious (because it is), but it might not to a 7 year old. Most importantly, it's not a problem of the medium itself, but of the players cognizance of it.
However, even this, I'm not saying to ban anything. I'm against banning on principle, but I can see where it might raise a few eyebrows, and there's nothing wrong with saying you don't like it (freedom of speech goes both ways). But moreover, this can be intrepreted in other ways - a lot of pornography sites put out editions around Christmas where the women are in santa suits, the image being that the consumers are, in their own way, enjoying the holidays with the women they admire. Put in the other direction, if my wife (which I don't have) puts on a sexy santa costume it's having playful sexual fun with somebody I love - perhaps gamers feel the same way about those kind of clothes, where they love the character and the costume is a means of adding a sexual dimension to it. Obvious, with pornography and with games it can't be a completely mutually affectionate relationship as there is a screen between the viewer and the woman, and in the latter case the woman isn't even real - but it isn't necessarily of 'objectifiying' a female character as it adding sexuality to a close bond (again, as close as two people who have never met, one of them fictional.... can be.)