I hate that I even have to say it, but I abhor actual disgusting mistreatment of women or mistreatment of anyone, for that matter. So I don't need any lectures about being sensitive.
I watched one of Anita's videos, and her ridiculous complaints about supposed sexism are an insult to those who are subjected to ACTUAL mistreatment of women in some parts of the world. Anyone who is upset about the princess in Super Mario Bros not being a sufficiently empowered character seriously needs a new hobby. How sad is someone's existence that they seek to find and are bothered by supposed "sexism" everywhere they look.
Portraying gender stereotypes, traditional gender roles, and showing some female characters with nice, jiggly, big breasts on slender bodies is not the shameful crime she makes it out to be.
And we shouldn't have to apologize for liking big-breasted babes with porn star-like bodies.
It seems to me that feminist killjoys, in cahoots with cowed, feminized beta men and other politically correct ninnies, want to sterilize and take the fun out of everything that isn't 100% politically correct. Guess what, just because something offends us, it doesn't mean we should work to eradicate it.
As for objectifying game characters or seeing them as sexual objects, so what! Games are for entertainment, and people enjoy sexy things. And maybe the characters (as do many people in real life) like being seen as sex objects. Isn't that their right?
The only kind of sexual objectification that is truly and inherently WRONG is the sexualization of children. Any game developer or anyone else who engages in that ought to be shunned and shamed. But big breasts on an adult female character? Lighten up and enjoy the boob jiggle.
And, to respond to something someone here said earlier, if a developer wants to put a bunch of good-looking, naked guys in a game geared towards people inclined that way, then I say great! Knock yourselves out.
I hate that I even have to say it, but I abhor actual disgusting mistreatment of women or mistreatment of anyone, for that matter. So I don't need any lectures about being sensitive.
I watched one of Anita's videos, and her ridiculous complaints about supposed sexism are an insult to those who are subjected to ACTUAL mistreatment of women in some parts of the world. Anyone who is upset about the princess in Super Mario Bros not being a sufficiently empowered character seriously needs a new hobby. How sad is someone's existence that they seek to find and are bothered by supposed "sexism" everywhere they look.
Portraying gender stereotypes, traditional gender roles, and showing some female characters with nice, jiggly, big breasts on slender bodies is not the shameful crime she makes it out to be.
And we shouldn't have to apologize for liking big-breasted babes with porn star-like bodies.
It seems to me that feminist killjoys, in cahoots with cowed, feminized beta men and other politically correct ninnies, want to sterilize and take the fun out of everything that isn't 100% politically correct. Guess what, just because something offends us, it doesn't mean we should work to eradicate it.
As for objectifying game characters or seeing them as sexual objects, so what! Games are for entertainment, and people enjoy sexy things. And maybe the characters (as do many people in real life) like being seen as sex objects. Isn't that their right?
The only kind of sexual objectification that is truly and inherently WRONG is the sexualization of children. Any game developer or anyone else who engages in that ought to be shunned and shamed. But big breasts on an adult female character? Lighten up and enjoy the boob jiggle.
And, to respond to something someone here said earlier, if a developer wants to put a bunch of good-looking, naked guys in a game geared towards people inclined that way, then I say great! Knock yourselves out.
That shirt obviously.
Kidding. The money went into paying people to watch all these videos I guess. This is still pretty time consuming.
I mean this has to be the main reason she picks some really bad examples. She never played those games and because of that never understood what she criticized there.
If she is going to ask for money from people the least she should do is actually play the games before accusing them and then at least she wouldn't accuse satire games such as DLC quest...
Also if she didn't record the footage she has no right to use it for her own profit...
She should at least ask for permission first...
Yeah after reading the rest of the blog she does seem to go after the wrong games...
Angel was one of the most Badass characters in the game who you don't even know is living until you have to kill her as you have no choice...
The Irony is in that game you spend half the game trying to save Roland who is in distress...
While I'd say that Sarkeesian doesn't have to play all the games she shows in her videos (that's not the academic way either), she absolutely MUST cite her sources, and all of them.
At the time, Vicsor's page has some examples up which are very spotty, evidence-wise. Single screenshots especially of 8bit-games could easily be reproduced in Sarkeesian's own playthroughs. The Vicsor site is, at the time, going the wrong way in its criticism by going quantity instead of quality.
However, the footage comparisons sporting 3D graphics and numbers on screen are pretty hard evidence. She's doing this without giving the sources, and boy, she really shouldn't.
she absolutely MUST cite her sources, and all of them.
Yes. There is so much space left in those neat boxes with the game title she uses in the video.
Also there is also only a few users that were used as sources. CubeX55 seems to be a main source for those clips.
The problem is that some of these clips are undoubtedly not her own recording and that is enough to raise doubts if any of them are.
Er, Cho Aniki is more of a parody of a common Japanese stereotype for homosexual men, that of the big bodybuilder type. It's equivalent to a really surreal culturally shifted Will and Grace. The point is to laugh at it, not to be turned on by it.
Yes. There is so much space left in those neat boxes with the game title she uses in the video.
To get all this stuff across, she always has to be decided, bossy, convinced especially of herself. Showing any weakness with this frequency of assholes knocking at your door, that's actually a really bad idea. It will be rather interesting to see if she still has the guts to apologize for faulty academic procedure. I acknowledge most of the theories in these videos, but this might be the moment we can actually judge her character.
I'm still not entirely sure why she's in any way required to mention every single instance of what anybody might consider good representation, why she has to be "balanced".
Video game portrayals of gender issues(and, frankly, all minority issues) really AREN'T balanced, and her argument is that video games predominantly use tropes in a way that is harmful or(at least) exclusionary and exploitative. I don't see why she has to water down her message by making the argument against her own case for you, or take the punch out by being wishy-washy about it.
I don't see why she has to water down her message by making the argument against her own case for you, or take the punch out by being wishy-washy about it.
She has to because she is stopping you to do it for her by disabling comments & ratings for those videos.
She has to because she is stopping you to do it for her by disabling comments & ratings for those videos.
Oh puh-lease. :mad:
I think we had already agreed on page one of this thread - after Fawful posted a few of those youtube comments - that this was hardly the platform for any kind of fruitful exchange.
I think we had already agreed on page one of this thread - after Fawful posted a few of those youtube comments - that this was hardly the platform for any kind of fruitful exchange.
I disagree. She fully had to expect what she got there. And since them money she got for the videos went nowhere in particular she could just hire someone to manage comments for her. She hasn't. She took the easy way out. The way that wouldn't ever show her how wrong she is. Because she doesn't want to hear that.
Even if she doesn't want to enable comments at least enable voting.
She got rape threats. A society in which a woman is required to expect and allow rape threats in her video comments section is one that really needs to be examined in the way she is examining it. She had every right to disable comments on that video.
I hate that I even have to say it, but I abhor actual disgusting mistreatment of women or mistreatment of anyone, for that matter. So I don't need any lectures about being sensitive.
I watched one of Anita's videos, and her ridiculous complaints about supposed sexism are an insult to those who are subjected to ACTUAL mistreatment of women in some parts of the world. Anyone who is upset about the princess in Super Mario Bros not being a sufficiently empowered character seriously needs a new hobby. How sad is someone's existence that they seek to find and are bothered by supposed "sexism" everywhere they look.
Portraying gender stereotypes, traditional gender roles, and showing some female characters with nice, jiggly, big breasts on slender bodies is not the shameful crime she makes it out to be.
And we shouldn't have to apologize for liking big-breasted babes with porn star-like bodies.
It seems to me that feminist killjoys, in cahoots with cowed, feminized beta men and other politically correct ninnies, want to sterilize and take the fun out of everything that isn't 100% politically correct. Guess what, just because something offends us, it doesn't mean we should work to eradicate it.
As for objectifying game characters or seeing them as sexual objects, so what! Games are for entertainment, and people enjoy sexy things. And maybe the characters (as do many people in real life) like being seen as sex objects. Isn't that their right?
The only kind of sexual objectification that is truly and inherently WRONG is the sexualization of children. Any game developer or anyone else who engages in that ought to be shunned and shamed. But big breasts on an adult female character? Lighten up and enjoy the boob jiggle.
And, to respond to something someone here said earlier, if a developer wants to put a bunch of good-looking, naked guys in a game geared towards people inclined that way, then I say great! Knock yourselves out.
Allow me to rephrase what you have just said: "Rape is wrong BUT... My personal entertainment and enjoyment is more important than your rights as a human being. And honestly, you should be ashamed of yourself from trying to make me feel bad about my decision to place my entertainment first. I frankly don't understand why any woman would be upset over being constantly represented by media as nothing more than big breasts on a slender body unless they only want to take away my entertainment and make me feel bad for liking it. In fact, I'm going to highlight this point by completely removing women from my argument and only reference them by the sole part of their anatomy that I'm interested in: boobies. That's how we reference women now, isn't it? They're basically boobies on a slender body. And really, they like it anyways, so that makes it okay.
Also, child porn is wrong. And if someone made a game with a cockhydra in it, I'd be totally okay with it existing and not complain about sexual objectification. Because I'm a better person than that unlike those thin-skinned feminazis."
Video games aren't the problem. They're a symptom of a problem in our society. This kind of thinking is. The kind of thinking that women should just deal with it and move on. Well guess what? The dealing has been done and it hasn't worked. The disease will rage on unless the symptoms are correctly identified and video games are a very clear symptom. If gamers can't even see that such portrayals can only perpetuate a damaging image of women, then progress outside of the gaming world will be far more difficult.
It's not about taking away entertainment. It's about mutual respect, plain and simple. And when you see someone only as a form of entertainment, it's hard to respect them. Your constant use of "boobies on a slender body" demonstrates that when you're thinking about a woman, you're not thinking about a person. It would be like if I referred to all men as a "cock on a muscular body" because those are the only important things about that person.
And since them money she got for the videos went nowhere in particular she could just hire someone to manage comments for her. She hasn't. She took the easy way out. The way that wouldn't ever show her how wrong she is. Because she doesn't want to hear that.
Even you will have to admit that there are far more thoughtful comments on, say, the TWD boards here than the entirety of youtube. I'll say it again: Youtube might be good for presenting your videos, but rarely has anything good come from the comments.
The way that wouldn't ever show her how wrong she is. Because she doesn't want to hear that.
The fact that the videos generate a lot of backlash doesn't mean she's 'wrong'. And we've been at this part of the discussion before already. Most of what she says is factual. As in 'history lesson'. The question "right or wrong" doesn't play a relevant part in discussing what she does and why she does it. That's the categories youtube commenters think in. Desperately.
Even if she doesn't want to enable comments at least enable voting.
Oh, a blind good that would do. "She's downvoted, so her video has to be bad!". Is that the kind of personal satisfaction you're after? Well, have a ball buying an Xbox One. I'm sure the Amazon customer reviews will be stellar and just as reliable. If you want to see 'rebuttals', look them up on youtube. I don't know if there are any good ones, because I've only seen four of the most prominent, and I have to puke when I see how those half wits keep going on and on and on about what has never been the topic in the first place. These guys actually feel insulted. It makes for a good laugh.
I watched one of Anita's videos, and her ridiculous complaints about supposed sexism are an insult to those who are subjected to ACTUAL mistreatment of women in some parts of the world. [...] It seems to me that feminist killjoys, in cahoots with cowed, feminized beta men and other politically correct ninnies, want to sterilize and take the fun out of everything that isn't 100% politically correct. Guess what, just because something offends us, it doesn't mean we should work to eradicate it.
Haven't got much to add to Alcoremortis' post here, but, no, a critique of sexism in fiction is not an insult to mistreated women, and, no, there is no feminist conspiracy to take the fun out of your games. :rolleyes:
She was probably right to deactivate the Youtube comments section it is a mess...
She has some good points but she isn't the best at choosing games to question...
There are plenty of games she could use to prove her point and she chooses many which are completely unfounded...
It seems to me that people are forgetting that Lee was a False Protagonist. Clementine was the real protagonist of Season 1; the player was just there to help her along. Can anyone deny that Clementine was a stronge female protagonist by the end? I also would like to point out that the reason that most stories in video games are written from a man's perspective is because most of the writers are GASP men. It's difficult to write a believable story from a female perspective without the first hand experience. What we usually end up getting is either something out of a feminist propaganda pamphlet, or something completely sexist. The fact that the characters in this game have dodged both those pitfalls (although some of them were pretty two-dimensionally annoying and bitchy) is a miracle to say the least. I think it would be nice to find a realistic female protagonist as the main character, but I'm not holding my breathe.
That's stupid. I've been writing stories from a male perspective for years and posting them on the internet and not one person has ever been able to tell that I'm not male from my writing of male characters. It is ludicrously easy to understand a person of a different gender's needs and wants if you view them as an actual person.
I tend to find that writing women is far easier if you don't actually write them as a woman, but as a completely gender-neutral being. Then once you're done, go back and add the minimum needed to convey that she's a woman.
I tend to find that writing women is far easier if you don't actually write them as a woman, but as a completely gender-neutral being. Then once you're done, go back and add the minimum needed to convey that she's a woman.
But that's just me.
It certainly isn't "just you". Most of us would immediately reach for stereotypes when trying to describe 'how women are'. It's just wrong, you don't end up with full fledged characters. You wouldn't do the same if you were trying to describe 'a man'. You don't start out with the thought 'what makes him different from a woman?'. It's exactly the same vice versa.
While Clem was a major character of TWD Season 1. I would go with its more or less focused on Lee and Clem's friendship throughout the story and Lee's interactions with the group. We go from Lee trying to help Clem find her parents to Lee putting his life on the line to protect Clem at all costs.
Actually, he was...the story was not about lee, it was about clementine.
[off topic]
You're misinterpreting things. Believe people with a degree in literature. Lee Everett is the protagonist of Telltale's first Walking Dead Season. This isn't a Great Gatsby situation, where Jay Gatsby can be the protagonist although we're following the story through Nick Carraway. While Carraway does nothing at all to further the plot, Lee Everett sure as hell does.
Narratives where the protagonist is killed at the end of the story are numerous, and they in no way invalidate said person as a protagonist. Clementine is cute and all, but entire episodes go by in which she hardly has minutes of screen time. It is absolutely impossible, I repeat, absolutely impossible to interpret Lee as a 'false protagonist'. Sorry, man!
People just latched onto Clementine (as the developers intended) and that's the main character they take away from the experience, for better or worse. Not judging, just saying.
After reading this page from something Anita wrote, I feel like continuing to criticise her would just be aiming for low hanging fruit. Instead, I feel like writing about women and their roles in different games. Let's see how far into that I can get.
Allow me to rephrase what you have just said: "Rape is wrong BUT... My personal entertainment and enjoyment is more important than your rights as a human being. And honestly, you should be ashamed of yourself from trying to make me feel bad about my decision to place my entertainment first. I frankly don't understand why any woman would be upset over being constantly represented by media as nothing more than big breasts on a slender body unless
Ok, so, boob jiggle and one-dimensional female characters in video games make it more likely that women will be raped in real life, or will create an environment where raping women is more tolerated? Baloney! Not buying it. Neither you nor Anita provide one scintilla of evidence that video game plots have any effect on actual mistreatment of women. You can argue whether games reflect or shape culture, but you discredit yourself with the laughable, cheap implication suggesting that resisting the PC police's attempts to sterilize games of anything that offends them is akin to excusing or not caring about sexual abuse of women.
This is all about a group of language and PC Police, ever vigilant in exposing and seeking to ban so-called heteronormative, patriarchal, objectification, so-called male gaze catering, blah blah to the point of ridiculousness. Where does this end? More of you should be concerned about the danger posed by politically correct bullies who seek to ban all that offends them or that which they disagree with. This is not merely about simple, harmless examination of tropes.
I never imagined that my love for King's Quest, which first brought me to this forum, would eventually lead to my defending boob jiggle.
But fly the flag for boob jiggle on this forum and show appreciation for the wonderful practice of putting scantily-clad, ample breasted babes in games I shall!
The problem I find with boob juggle is that it's very distracting. If you're making a game specifically about women in skimpy clothing and whatnot (say, DOA), then fine, go wild. But if you're trying to make a serious game, maybe leave it out - or at the very least tone it down to a minimum so we're not focusing on them over all else.
MntPeak, you're making yourself out to look like a 13 year old kid.
Excessive boob jiggle, especially when it's the most actively moving part of a character, IS distracting. Along with one dimensional character development, it shows that developers of these games don't think very highly of their audience.
It's like how Grown Ups 2 won out Pacific Rim at the box office, except almost everything is Grown Ups 2.
Does Anita S. only cherry pick and nitpick console games, or does she apply her silly "let's look for sexism" exercise to PC games as well?
Does she cover the wonderful King's Quest 4, starring the classy, brave and beautiful (how sexist of me to notice her beauty) Rosella of Daventry, who completes a daring quest to save her father's life?
Anita's hammer is her motivation to portray women as victims of patriarchy wherever and however she can, so almost every game with female characters looks like a nail to her, to messily paraphrase the old saying.
It's one thing to notice cliches and portrayals of gender roles, but it's another thing altogether to characterize such absolutely harmless depictions as a danger to society or to women in particular.
How many of you have taken a sociology or gender/ethnic studies class in college/university? If you have, then you know the drill. They all boil down to one thing: endlessly pushing the notion that a particular group is a victim of the straight white male. The solution to the victimized groups' "problem," according to this ideology, is almost invariably to advocate for speech code enforcement and the labeling of anyone in violation of the new PC code as anti-woman or anti this or that group. Why do I mention this? Because Anita's videos come off like someone who just sat through a year of "gender studies 101" garbage and now sees the world in terms of how horrible a place it is for women.
MntPeak, you're making yourself out to look like a 13 year old kid.
Even 13 year old kids would have the sense to know that boob jiggle is fun and doesn't harm anyone. Is enjoying sexy, jiggly tits not something an adult should admit to? I am not one bit ashamed to say that I enjoy boob jiggle. Others may find it distracting, or want to say so because they think it's what they're supposed to say, and that's their right, but not I. I dare say many other gamers also enjoy it.
If an element of game design draws so much attention that it leads to the complete sexualisation of a female character, Anita Sarkeesian would like to have it out of the game.
I believe that this is not hard to understand, not at all.
I'm sorry, did you just suggest that women are not sexualised by definition? (and btw...my spell check keeps telling me that sexualised is not a real word...which is kind of ironic) As soon as you add gender to the equation in any form, sexualisation is already part of the equation. The only way to remove sexualisation is to remove all gender...and then we remove the humanity in it. Let's face it...even if you remove all gender from the equation, people will add they own perceptions of the genders of the characters, so it is impossible to remove sexualisation from the equation.
I don't agree. You can have romance in a story without sex.
Look at the Harry Potter books. None of the characters are "sexualized" beyond what innocent romantic feelings Harry has for Cho or Ginny. Yet the girls in the books are very obviously girls. Rowling even hits the nail on the head with exactly how guys think without having to add sex to anything in the books. This is why I feel that her saying Dumbledore is gay (as opposed to simply being an old bachelor) in an interview was nothing more than pandering to the gay community. His sex life is irrelevant to the story or his character arc, and saying that about him adds nothing.
Also, The Lord of the Rings. Is Galadriel, Arwen or Eowen sexualized? No.
So, yes. You can have women in a story without overtly associating them with sexual desire.
Look at the Harry Potter books. None of the characters are "sexualized" beyond what innocent romantic feelings Harry has for Cho or Ginny. Yet the girls in the books are very obviously girls. Rowling even hits the nail on the head with exactly how guys think without having to add sex to anything in the books.
You obviously missed the entire book where Ron is pretty much face raping the first girl that shows him attention. Yea, no sexualisation there.
Comments
I watched one of Anita's videos, and her ridiculous complaints about supposed sexism are an insult to those who are subjected to ACTUAL mistreatment of women in some parts of the world. Anyone who is upset about the princess in Super Mario Bros not being a sufficiently empowered character seriously needs a new hobby. How sad is someone's existence that they seek to find and are bothered by supposed "sexism" everywhere they look.
Portraying gender stereotypes, traditional gender roles, and showing some female characters with nice, jiggly, big breasts on slender bodies is not the shameful crime she makes it out to be.
And we shouldn't have to apologize for liking big-breasted babes with porn star-like bodies.
It seems to me that feminist killjoys, in cahoots with cowed, feminized beta men and other politically correct ninnies, want to sterilize and take the fun out of everything that isn't 100% politically correct. Guess what, just because something offends us, it doesn't mean we should work to eradicate it.
As for objectifying game characters or seeing them as sexual objects, so what! Games are for entertainment, and people enjoy sexy things. And maybe the characters (as do many people in real life) like being seen as sex objects. Isn't that their right?
The only kind of sexual objectification that is truly and inherently WRONG is the sexualization of children. Any game developer or anyone else who engages in that ought to be shunned and shamed. But big breasts on an adult female character? Lighten up and enjoy the boob jiggle.
And, to respond to something someone here said earlier, if a developer wants to put a bunch of good-looking, naked guys in a game geared towards people inclined that way, then I say great! Knock yourselves out.
They already did...
EDIT: More than once...
That shirt obviously.
Kidding. The money went into paying people to watch all these videos I guess. This is still pretty time consuming.
I mean this has to be the main reason she picks some really bad examples. She never played those games and because of that never understood what she criticized there.
Also if she didn't record the footage she has no right to use it for her own profit...
She should at least ask for permission first...
http://victorsopinion.blogspot.be/
Angel was one of the most Badass characters in the game who you don't even know is living until you have to kill her as you have no choice...
The Irony is in that game you spend half the game trying to save Roland who is in distress...
At the time, Vicsor's page has some examples up which are very spotty, evidence-wise. Single screenshots especially of 8bit-games could easily be reproduced in Sarkeesian's own playthroughs. The Vicsor site is, at the time, going the wrong way in its criticism by going quantity instead of quality.
However, the footage comparisons sporting 3D graphics and numbers on screen are pretty hard evidence. She's doing this without giving the sources, and boy, she really shouldn't.
Yes. There is so much space left in those neat boxes with the game title she uses in the video.
Also there is also only a few users that were used as sources. CubeX55 seems to be a main source for those clips.
The problem is that some of these clips are undoubtedly not her own recording and that is enough to raise doubts if any of them are.
To get all this stuff across, she always has to be decided, bossy, convinced especially of herself. Showing any weakness with this frequency of assholes knocking at your door, that's actually a really bad idea. It will be rather interesting to see if she still has the guts to apologize for faulty academic procedure. I acknowledge most of the theories in these videos, but this might be the moment we can actually judge her character.
Video game portrayals of gender issues(and, frankly, all minority issues) really AREN'T balanced, and her argument is that video games predominantly use tropes in a way that is harmful or(at least) exclusionary and exploitative. I don't see why she has to water down her message by making the argument against her own case for you, or take the punch out by being wishy-washy about it.
She has to because she is stopping you to do it for her by disabling comments & ratings for those videos.
Oh puh-lease. :mad:
I think we had already agreed on page one of this thread - after Fawful posted a few of those youtube comments - that this was hardly the platform for any kind of fruitful exchange.
Exactly.
I disagree. She fully had to expect what she got there. And since them money she got for the videos went nowhere in particular she could just hire someone to manage comments for her. She hasn't. She took the easy way out. The way that wouldn't ever show her how wrong she is. Because she doesn't want to hear that.
Even if she doesn't want to enable comments at least enable voting.
Allow me to rephrase what you have just said: "Rape is wrong BUT... My personal entertainment and enjoyment is more important than your rights as a human being. And honestly, you should be ashamed of yourself from trying to make me feel bad about my decision to place my entertainment first. I frankly don't understand why any woman would be upset over being constantly represented by media as nothing more than big breasts on a slender body unless they only want to take away my entertainment and make me feel bad for liking it. In fact, I'm going to highlight this point by completely removing women from my argument and only reference them by the sole part of their anatomy that I'm interested in: boobies. That's how we reference women now, isn't it? They're basically boobies on a slender body. And really, they like it anyways, so that makes it okay.
Also, child porn is wrong. And if someone made a game with a cockhydra in it, I'd be totally okay with it existing and not complain about sexual objectification. Because I'm a better person than that unlike those thin-skinned feminazis."
Video games aren't the problem. They're a symptom of a problem in our society. This kind of thinking is. The kind of thinking that women should just deal with it and move on. Well guess what? The dealing has been done and it hasn't worked. The disease will rage on unless the symptoms are correctly identified and video games are a very clear symptom. If gamers can't even see that such portrayals can only perpetuate a damaging image of women, then progress outside of the gaming world will be far more difficult.
It's not about taking away entertainment. It's about mutual respect, plain and simple. And when you see someone only as a form of entertainment, it's hard to respect them. Your constant use of "boobies on a slender body" demonstrates that when you're thinking about a woman, you're not thinking about a person. It would be like if I referred to all men as a "cock on a muscular body" because those are the only important things about that person.
Also, still on my shit list.
Even you will have to admit that there are far more thoughtful comments on, say, the TWD boards here than the entirety of youtube. I'll say it again: Youtube might be good for presenting your videos, but rarely has anything good come from the comments.
Expect, yes. Take part in her own abuse, no siree.
The fact that the videos generate a lot of backlash doesn't mean she's 'wrong'. And we've been at this part of the discussion before already. Most of what she says is factual. As in 'history lesson'. The question "right or wrong" doesn't play a relevant part in discussing what she does and why she does it. That's the categories youtube commenters think in. Desperately.
Oh, a blind good that would do. "She's downvoted, so her video has to be bad!". Is that the kind of personal satisfaction you're after? Well, have a ball buying an Xbox One. I'm sure the Amazon customer reviews will be stellar and just as reliable. If you want to see 'rebuttals', look them up on youtube. I don't know if there are any good ones, because I've only seen four of the most prominent, and I have to puke when I see how those half wits keep going on and on and on about what has never been the topic in the first place. These guys actually feel insulted. It makes for a good laugh.
Haven't got much to add to Alcoremortis' post here, but, no, a critique of sexism in fiction is not an insult to mistreated women, and, no, there is no feminist conspiracy to take the fun out of your games. :rolleyes:
Character.
Object.
Char-ac-ter.
Obbbbbb-UH-JECT.
She has some good points but she isn't the best at choosing games to question...
There are plenty of games she could use to prove her point and she chooses many which are completely unfounded...
But that's just me.
EDIT: Oh hey, this week's Jimqusition is faintly relevant to things a page and a half ago.
EDIT 2: No, it's not. I just wanted to push the Jimquisition.
It certainly isn't "just you". Most of us would immediately reach for stereotypes when trying to describe 'how women are'. It's just wrong, you don't end up with full fledged characters. You wouldn't do the same if you were trying to describe 'a man'. You don't start out with the thought 'what makes him different from a woman?'. It's exactly the same vice versa.
I don't see where you're going here. Lee, however, wasn't a 'false protagonist'.
[off topic]
You're misinterpreting things. Believe people with a degree in literature. Lee Everett is the protagonist of Telltale's first Walking Dead Season. This isn't a Great Gatsby situation, where Jay Gatsby can be the protagonist although we're following the story through Nick Carraway. While Carraway does nothing at all to further the plot, Lee Everett sure as hell does.
[/off topic]
Anyway. Back to Anita Spockessian, if we may.
Ok, so, boob jiggle and one-dimensional female characters in video games make it more likely that women will be raped in real life, or will create an environment where raping women is more tolerated? Baloney! Not buying it. Neither you nor Anita provide one scintilla of evidence that video game plots have any effect on actual mistreatment of women. You can argue whether games reflect or shape culture, but you discredit yourself with the laughable, cheap implication suggesting that resisting the PC police's attempts to sterilize games of anything that offends them is akin to excusing or not caring about sexual abuse of women.
This is all about a group of language and PC Police, ever vigilant in exposing and seeking to ban so-called heteronormative, patriarchal, objectification, so-called male gaze catering, blah blah to the point of ridiculousness. Where does this end? More of you should be concerned about the danger posed by politically correct bullies who seek to ban all that offends them or that which they disagree with. This is not merely about simple, harmless examination of tropes.
But fly the flag for boob jiggle on this forum and show appreciation for the wonderful practice of putting scantily-clad, ample breasted babes in games I shall!
For boob jiggle! For freedom!
Excessive boob jiggle, especially when it's the most actively moving part of a character, IS distracting. Along with one dimensional character development, it shows that developers of these games don't think very highly of their audience.
It's like how Grown Ups 2 won out Pacific Rim at the box office, except almost everything is Grown Ups 2.
Does she cover the wonderful King's Quest 4, starring the classy, brave and beautiful (how sexist of me to notice her beauty) Rosella of Daventry, who completes a daring quest to save her father's life?
Anita's hammer is her motivation to portray women as victims of patriarchy wherever and however she can, so almost every game with female characters looks like a nail to her, to messily paraphrase the old saying.
It's one thing to notice cliches and portrayals of gender roles, but it's another thing altogether to characterize such absolutely harmless depictions as a danger to society or to women in particular.
How many of you have taken a sociology or gender/ethnic studies class in college/university? If you have, then you know the drill. They all boil down to one thing: endlessly pushing the notion that a particular group is a victim of the straight white male. The solution to the victimized groups' "problem," according to this ideology, is almost invariably to advocate for speech code enforcement and the labeling of anyone in violation of the new PC code as anti-woman or anti this or that group. Why do I mention this? Because Anita's videos come off like someone who just sat through a year of "gender studies 101" garbage and now sees the world in terms of how horrible a place it is for women.
Even 13 year old kids would have the sense to know that boob jiggle is fun and doesn't harm anyone. Is enjoying sexy, jiggly tits not something an adult should admit to? I am not one bit ashamed to say that I enjoy boob jiggle. Others may find it distracting, or want to say so because they think it's what they're supposed to say, and that's their right, but not I. I dare say many other gamers also enjoy it.
I believe that this is not hard to understand, not at all.
Look at the Harry Potter books. None of the characters are "sexualized" beyond what innocent romantic feelings Harry has for Cho or Ginny. Yet the girls in the books are very obviously girls. Rowling even hits the nail on the head with exactly how guys think without having to add sex to anything in the books. This is why I feel that her saying Dumbledore is gay (as opposed to simply being an old bachelor) in an interview was nothing more than pandering to the gay community. His sex life is irrelevant to the story or his character arc, and saying that about him adds nothing.
Also, The Lord of the Rings. Is Galadriel, Arwen or Eowen sexualized? No.
So, yes. You can have women in a story without overtly associating them with sexual desire.
You obviously missed the entire book where Ron is pretty much face raping the first girl that shows him attention. Yea, no sexualisation there.
Actually...yes, I do think the elvish women were very feminine, and you cannot be feminine or masculine without sexualisation.