That's kind of bullshit. It is not as if I can demand a refund upon discovering an offensive segment. If I could know ahead of time? I definitely would. But you can never know ahead of time what you're going to get in a game.
This kind of shit is why I don't find games like Saints Row to be appealing...
And in any case, her making these videos helps educate gamers on the morality of this shit in games, so that more can demand change. It's quite pathetic that so many people hate her.
I think her criticism is valuable. It is meant to make developers aware of how wrong-headed many of their decisions are.
And there are actual gameplay footages of the offending segments. I actually find them annoying as well when I encounter them in a game.
Sarkeesian isn't cutehot to you? Really?
HNNNG
Also...I actually agree with most of what she says.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZPSrwedvsg
It's kind of true.
Not necessarily. When is it okay to wear blackface? Some things are too offensive to ever be acceptable in polite society. I'm not sure anything being discussed falls into that category, but I think it is something that society is still deciding, these conversations will help decide what is and is not acceptable.The challange I have to ask is when is it OK. It has to be OK at some point right?
I agree, and I think that many of the feminists that are complaining are looking at decades old games and not giving enough credit for progress. I think that is the case because in their minds video games are a new thing, they don't realize that there is already a long history of improvement. We are working a lot of this out already.But as early as a decade ago games have become more inclusive of females. Alyx in HL2 is a perfect example.
There used to be a thing called a minstrelsy. A minstrelsy was a show consisting of comic skits, variety acts, dancing, and music, performed in blackface. This sort of show, and most of the stories they told, are almost completely gone now. They are simply too offinsive, and there is no place for them in our society anymore. This is not censorship, it is a change in sensibilities.What needs to happen isn't an attempt at destroying possible ways to tell a story till it's only your approved story left. It should be about propping stories that match their criteria.
And we are going to see this happen. More and more women are getting into gaming, and they are going to naturally be more inclined to like those things which do not belittle them. It will be awhile before their numbers are large enough to make large scale changes, but it is going to happen.If every Feminist bought the games that actually furthered the ideals some of which are fantastic games (TR and TLoU for example) or half of them bought the games that were merely OK (Remember Me and Mirror's Edge) then there would be more of these out there.
It does not invalidate their opinions. The stories that video games tell are affecting our social identity, and they have every right to be concerned about how that is affecting them.Or two most of them don't actually play games. Which invalidates their opinions.
I think that they would want to be included if we did not take such pains to let them know that they are not welcome. It feels a little like a chicken and the egg sort of situation.You can't prattle on about the justice of not being included if you never really wanted to be included.
There is a big difference between wanting to expand the market and open developers eyes that easy to use tropes is not only sloppy but potentially damaging. It's something that carries farther than just women rights. Then actually calling for the use of tropes altogether because you don't like them or the affect you think they have on culture. Anita is on the wrong side of that conversation. But that still doesn't mean she should be getting the abuse she receives.
I don't know about that. Having witnessed first hand how bad it can be, I think you are underestimating just how toxic the gaming community is to women. The very fact that a part of this thread is focused on if Sarkeesian is 'doable' or not points at how casually hostile it has become.It's not true to the severity that she's trying to insinuate.
If we learned anything from the civil rights movement it should be that our words matter. Our stories matter. They form our social language, and inform our social conscience. The stories we read, watch, and live in our media changes how we think. She has every right to complain that those stories are treating women badly. No matter if you believe that art follows life or life follows art, it means that women are getting a stinky stick.If a game is made by men and it's marketed toward men, then who gives a flying four letter word for intercourse?
Nobody is making you listen to her criticism. See how that works both ways?Nobody's making her play these games.
Yes, yes. We all agree it is probably Obama's fault. Better check your tin hat is on tight.She wants to entirely control what content is produced because, ultimately, she is jealous of the attention because she's one of those women who views everything female as competition. She just can't handle the idea that there are games that are made by men for men.
If we learned anything from the civil rights movement it should be that our words matter. Our stories matter. They form our social language, and inform our social conscience. The stories we read, watch, and live in our media changes how we think. She has every right to complain that those stories are treating women badly. No matter if you believe that art follows life or life follows art, it means that women are getting a stinky stick.
That attitude is part of the problem. Women play games too. In the 0-15 demographics I would bet that as many girls play games as boys. Nearly everyone in the next generation will play at least the occasional video game for entertainment. If the women stop playing video games as they get older it is because men have pushed them out.That's great and all but if games were not made for men nobody would buy them
And anyway they are just games , it's not a way of life it's just a leisure activity.
That attitude is part of the problem. Women play games too. In the 0-15 demographics I would bet that as many girls play games as boys. Nearly everyone in the next generation will play at least the occasional video game for entertainment. If the women stop playing video games as they get older it is because men have pushed them out.
It is more than 'just a leisure activity' it is a social story-telling tool. When you play a video game you are experiencing a story, and not just the one that the game developer created, but unique ones that you create in every conversation you have over chat, in every choice you make to save the princess or teabag the noob. You are creating the society you live in as you live in it.
That attitude is part of the problem. Women play games too. In the 0-15 demographics I would bet that as many girls play games as boys. Nearly everyone in the next generation will play at least the occasional video game for entertainment. If the women stop playing video games as they get older it is because men have pushed them out.
It is more than 'just a leisure activity' it is a social story-telling tool. When you play a video game you are experiencing a story, and not just the one that the game developer created, but unique ones that you create in every conversation you have over chat, in every choice you make to save the princess or teabag the noob. You are creating the society you live in as you live in it.
It seems that her side is willing to discuss it, but the other is flat out hostile to any conversation.
The only things that tells me is which side you're on.
Any calm, rational criticism of "her side" presented by gamers results in the exact same response as they give the death threats. "Gamer nerds should get beat up, shitlords. LOL."
One thing I've learned as I've been digging into their attacks on atheism and other groups is that SJWs are never interested in reasoned debate. They want to barge in, tell everyone how it is, and any opposition is immediately labeled an evil woman hating misogynist.
It's sickening really, how they can infect others like a cancer, though I can relate to it because they've been in religions also.
Not necessarily. When is it okay to wear blackface? Some things are too offensive to ever be acceptable in polite society. I'm not sure anything being discussed falls into that category, but I think it is something that society is still deciding, these conversations will help decide what is and is not acceptable.
Well it makes sense as any market grows. You have to nurture it as much as possible till it hits mainstream. It makes sense that you market to young men when young men who are familiar with electronics are the only ones buying them. But if Michael Bay can continue to make Transformers, then we should still be able to get our GTA's. Like I said their is a difference between growing past using a certain plot point and banning it.I agree, and I think that many of the feminists that are complaining are looking at decades old games and not giving enough credit for progress. I think that is the case because in their minds video games are a new thing, they don't realize that there is already a long history of improvement. We are working a lot of this out already.
Maybe they died because they were offensive and maybe because societies tastes changed. Grunge died in the late 90's but I don't recall anyone asking for it's banning. Whereas Minstrelsy's died in 1910 where racism was rampant. It's usage after that was almost always done for completely racist reasons. That said its crude and purposely inflammatory now, but its up to the artist. I already posted examples above on how blackface was done correctly but even if it was inflammatory there is no law that bans it's use.There used to be a thing called a minstrelsy. A minstrelsy was a show consisting of comic skits, variety acts, dancing, and music, performed in blackface. This sort of show, and most of the stories they told, are almost completely gone now. They are simply too offinsive, and there is no place for them in our society anymore. This is not censorship, it is a change in sensibilities.
I disagree. I can't possibly disagree any more than I do. If someone wants to self censor for money, that's their right. But I do not for one second believe it is ever ok to tell someone they can't write a story a particular way. Might as well resort to book burning.My point is that we might have to give up some stories. If they harm parts of our society they just might not be worth the cost of telling.
This is the one area that I am probably going to sound a little Gamergatish. I am not a big fan of either party here. About the only complaint I have seen from female gamers is over sized boobs (they would soooo get in the way) and DOA type boob physics (they would never jiggle like that). There are certain females that won't play the types of games where this stuff happens mostly for other reasons than the "demeaning things".And we are going to see this happen. More and more women are getting into gaming, and they are going to naturally be more inclined to like those things which do not belittle them. It will be awhile before their numbers are large enough to make large scale changes, but it is going to happen.
No we don't. What we can affect is what we personally intake and what our children intake. From that point I believe in the openness of all mediums for any topic and let the publishers and the buyers determine their profitability and that will determine how many people develop similar works. I hate Rap. I have always hated rap. I didn't like most what early 00's rap was about. But I never once suggested it should be banned. I just banned it from my radio.It does not invalidate their opinions. The stories that video games tell are affecting our social identity, and they have every right to be concerned about how that is affecting them.
Well it's the egg. I don't even understand how that even became a saying. It has to be the egg. Anyways. There are thousands of games that use almost none of these tropes. Any game portraying any time period before 1960ish is going to include these tropes it would be ignorant not to. So once you take those out what we are again getting at is a handful of AAA games that can contain content "degrading to females". That's not what is keeping them out and they can't go away. They are the best sellers. The big problem Anita is going to have is 1. The games that follow her creed tend to do horribly. 2. The women and men that would get worked up over these scenes again tend not be the ones that would play a game where that took place. If I was to take lets say Assisins Creed 2 and swapped sexes with everyone, guess what? I'll probably still play it and women wouldn't (to be fair I played a Femshep).I think that they would want to be included if we did not take such pains to let them know that they are not welcome. It feels a little like a chicken and the egg sort of situation.
I am all for some compromise in the middle. I don't really get Gamersgate, their issue with the SJW's and Feminists can't be won while Gamersgate still has life in itself and they seem to have nearly completely dropped the Journalist Ethics issue. But again I personally can never stand for any side that attempts to silence opposing views (GG) or any attempt to force censoring any medium. Lets put is this way. If Anita wants to ban and particular gaming story type. Then I want to see all Romance novels removed from book stores.Some tropes are damaging and should not be used, and it is through this sort of negotiations that we will decide what are actually to toxic to be saved, and what just feels that way now because of all the other toxic stuff around them. I won't say Anita is on the wrong side, she is just on one side, and us on the other. We need to meet in the middle. It seems that her side is willing to discuss it, but the other is flat out hostile to any conversation. We have to change that, it is only going to make things worse.
The worst kind
Jesus H Christ, look at some of the insanity coming out of the SJWs.
http://gamergateharassmen***************
But GamerGate are the hate mongers?
LOL
Prostate cancer?
Oh wait, prostate cancer is OK, breast cancer is bad. Because patriarchy.
It's not true to the severity that she's trying to insinuate.
If a game is made by men and it's marketed toward men, then who gives a flying four letter word for intercourse?
Nobody's making her play these games.
There ARE games out there made by women where a female is the lead role and that role is not overly sexualized.
Sarkeesyan's forked-tongue message is that she doesn't like that ANY game exists that she doesn't like. It's not that she doesn't approve of some games and thinks that men should be more conscious of the fact that women play games too. Her real agenda is that she PERSONALLY does not like certain aspects of games that almost literally no one else gives two fecal deposits about. She wants the entire market to change, she wants games that she doesn't like to stop existing.
She wants to entirely control what content is produced because, ultimately, she is jealous of the attention because she's one of those women who views everything female as competition. She just can't handle the idea that there are games that are made by men for men.
Can you tell me the story behind Bejeweled, Candy Crush or Tetris? Because those are the kinds of games that 90% of women play.
No wait, let me try it for you.
Bejeweled is a horrifying commentary on social homogeneity, wherein players are encouraged to make sure that only "like" pieces are next to each other.
Candy Crush is rife with patriarchal subtext encouraging the use of violence to make those that are different "fit."
Tetris is the most degrading to women, as it encourages players to look at unique pieces as mere "slots" in which to place their "pieces."
How'd I do?
What the **REMOVED** are you talking about? She's simply critiquing them for their poor choices. She is explaining why they are poor choices.
What she is pointing out are basically "cringe" moments in games. Most people buy games for the 90-95% of the game that is fun. But there is often a small part of the games which are cringe-worthy. Developers think it's funny or whatever, while she's pointing out how harmful such choices are.
I think it's valuable criticism.
Yes, but no one would do it without a lot of thought and consideration. It is not to be taken lightly, even if it is done in humor.There is a difference between wearing black face and for whatever reason having it portrayed on TV, movies and games. Sarah Silverman still has a career after doing a Blackface episode. Robert Downy Jr. has been critically acclaimed after doing a full movie in blackface. Portrail of an Act does not equal an act.
Here is where you and I will agree. I would not support any sort of legal ban. I haven't followed the whole Feminisim vs tropes thing to closely, but I was not under the impression that they were looking for legal bans. If I am wrong about that I'll change my mind fast.Like I said their is a difference between growing past using a certain plot point and banning it.
It was always offensive to those that it lampooned, and it disappeared as society changed to value those people.Maybe they died because they were offensive and maybe because societies tastes changed.
It was always a form of schadenfreude, humor at the expense of a group of people that had no way to defend themselves (socially that is). It was always racists. Always a method to keep society firmly focused on a Us vs Them mentality. But I don't really want this to devolve into a historical discussion, as fascinating as I find the subject, especially since I think we mostly agree on this subject.Whereas Minstrelsy's died in 1910 where racism was rampant. It's usage after that was almost always done for completely racist reasons.
I believe that her position should be seen as a starting position of a negotiation. I see her position as an exaggeration of what is reasonable, a pendulum that has swung too far in counterbalance to the status quo. If most of us are able to remain rational we will find a happy medium. That is why the whole gamergate thing is disturbing, it is such a massive over reaction that it causes it hard to maintain rationality on either side. Instead of looking for common ground to compromise both sides are building rhetorical trenches in preparation for an extended siege.What I have seen over the last few weeks is Anita taking something that is in favor now (and if you read any books written in the last 10k years as always been in favor) and saying it shouldn't be used ever again. That is wrong. Used less? Sure. Used properly? Sure. To never be used again? No. Because some tale need to have women disenfranchised, with out faculty, sexualized, demeaned, and so on. It happens in life, which leaves even more credence to its right to be in movies, games, and TV.
I don't think we need legal censorship, I think we need social pressure. I think that they have every right to tell producers not to make certain stories, and I feel that game producers have every right to fully ignore them.I disagree. I can't possibly disagree any more than I do. If someone wants to self censor for money, that's their right. But I do not for one second believe it is ever ok to tell someone they can't write a story a particular way. Might as well resort to book burning.
I know a lot of female gamers, and most of them play those games. Every time we talk about this they of course bring up the boobs (and the high heels, they complain alot about how real women take the heels off as soon as the action starts), but they talk about other things that they don't like as well. They talk about how simperingly useless women are most games, how if you watch you will notice that there is about a hundered things that most of these helpless princesses could do to improve their situation (or avoid it to beging with) but they never do any of those things, because they are women and the woman is not supposed to win. Even if it is not true it is how the women that are identifying with those damsels feel. I think it is because the people writing the stories never stopped to consider that anyone would ever identify with the distressed damsel instead of the hero that we know will rescue her.About the only complaint I have seen from female gamers is over sized boobs (they would soooo get in the way) and DOA type boob physics (they would never jiggle like that). There are certain females that won't play the types of games where this stuff happens mostly for other reasons than the "demeaning things".
My Sister won't play COD, GTA, or even TLoU. She isn't going to play TLoU even if it has really meaty and well thought out female characters. Why? Zombies and shooting. She isn't going to play GTA. Why? Not because of hookers and sex scenes, but because the idea of playing a bad guy going around stealing cars, doesn't appeal to her. She isn't going to play COD. Why? Well because she doesn't want to play and FPS where you go around shooting people.
I think you have misunderstood. They don't mind the sex scene, they enjoy it as much as you do. (have you ever read a romance novel? The word romance is just a euphemism for porn.) They mind that the woman, the character THEY identify with, is simply treated as an object. (Interestingly enough romance novels do this to the male characters, and it the main reason that guys do to not like them. It makes for an interesting comparison. It is a conversation society might should have as well, but one thing at a time.)I challenge you to find someone who would play through the death, destruction, and language of something like God of War and proceed to feel excluded and enraged at a skip-able sex scene.
I think you have misunderstood. They don't mind the sex scene, they enjoy it as much as you do. (have you ever read a romance novel? The word romance is just a euphemism for porn.) They mind that the woman, the character THEY identify with, is simply treated as an object. (Interestingly enough romance novels do this to the male characters, and it the main reason that guys do to not like them. It makes for an interesting comparison. It is a conversation society might should have as well, but one thing at a time.)