• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

"More than a Damsel in a dress" - Kite Tales. A better video with none of the budget.

J

jay

Member
Lyphen said:
They pick a subject based on prior studies/theories/knowledge, and then they explain what they're going to study and how they're going to define their constructs. But the important method to avoid bias is to present all of your information in your research paper, and distance yourself from the parts experimentation (with research assistants who don't know the goal of the experiment). The important thing that after you've created your hypothesis, the experiment isn't done with the goal in mind. You go back to the hypothesis after you have all of the data and conduct analysis.
Click to expand...

Aren't you biasing things by deciding what you are going to study? You lend sexism, racism, whatever credence by assuming it's an actual thing that can be looked for, no? Or would every test begin assuming these ideas may not exist in real life?

The issue I see is you seem to not want people to talk about the sexism they see until we all wait patiently for a scientist to give us research results. Or we can talk about it until people like to hear us talk, then we have to stop.

Sblargh said:
There is no such thing as just looking at the world without preconceptions and figuring it out.
Click to expand...

This was the point I was hoping to arrive at. I guess the issue may be the specific degree of bias. It's ok to be biased enough to think looking for sexism in games may be fruitful but it's too biased to already think it's there.
 
R

Relaxed Muscle

Member
APF said:
Maybe try not accusing me of holding a bias against a fictional character and calling me shortsighted when I'm making a fair point that can be discussed on its own terms? I noticed you didn't actually answer my question: are you sure you're not just making an immediate knee-jerk reaction without trying to absorb the words I'm saying?
Click to expand...

You said "There's still prize-winning going on" = Wrong in Zelda case.

And that "shitty boring cliche that plays on our historically-influenced perceptions of female vulnerability and objectification" = which is wrong in Zelda case

Rescuing Zelda is not a prize-winning, and neither she is vulnerable or an objectification, she has a key role in the plot and strong in her own way. What's more, in TP Link is totally in the hands of a female who dosn't doubt to scorn the hero in every moment.

So as long Dimsel in Distress dosn't fall in the vulnerability and objefication and it's more that a prize winning thing to fill male fantasies is not wrong using it.

You're idea of the whole deal is shortsighted and biased, Dimsel in Distress is not equally to those things if done right, I wasn't referring to your opinion of Zelda...

Also censoring autors is not the solution.

I hope is more clear now.
 
I

Inanna

Not pure anymore!
People that are calling Anita biased fail to see that people like this girl are also biased as well. They don't think sexism exist or that the portrayal of characters like Peach and Zelda is sexist because they grew up on these games, and love these characters and it is possible that they don't want to or can't see anyone talk about them in a negative way.

You just can't call one biased and not the other in the same breath!!
 
L

Lowlander2

Banned
Stumpokapow said:
I'm not sure I understand the point of a voiceover if 100% of what it says is going to be on screen. It's like a powerpoint presentation with reams of texts. Put up the bullet points and let the speaker elaborate on them.
Click to expand...

AND she has full captions on top of that, which truly baffles me.
 
T

Tylahedras

Banned
Wow, that video was an ass kicking.

I would just like to say that the reason that I and so many other people disregard these arguments is in part that they are frequently made badly by stupid people with agendas, Anita's being case in point.

I'd like to see what complaints KiteTales might have regarding the role of females in games because she's proven both a better mouthpiece and a more evenhanded and honest one.
 
S

Stet

Banned
Tylahedras said:
Wow, that video was an ass kicking.

I would just like to say that the reason that I and so many other people disregard these arguments is in part that they are frequently made badly by stupid people with agendas, Anita's being case in point.

I'd like to see what complaints KiteTales might have regarding the role of females in games because she's proven both a better mouthpiece and a more evenhanded and honest one.
Click to expand...

She won't have any complaints. Her role is to be a female gamer that agrees with gamers. That's why she has a following while Anita Sarkeesian gets death threats.
 
J

jay

Member
Inanna said:
People that are calling Anita biased fail to see that people like this girl are also biased as well. They don't think sexism exist or that the portrayal of characters like Peach and Zelda is sexist because they grew up on these games, and love these characters and it is possible that they don't want to or can't see anyone talk about them in a negative way.

You just can't call one biased and not the other in the same breath!!
Click to expand...

For some reason only the initial stating of an opinion is biased. The counter position is not. Unless people watch this video, then she will become an authority and our expectations will change and the video will retroactively become biased.

I'm sorry, Lyphen. We were actually having an interesting discussion but I couldn't help myself.
 
H

Htown

STOP SHITTING ON MY MOTHER'S HEADSTONE
the funny thing about the whole "censoring artists isn't the solution" nonsense is that artists are currently being censored because they're usually not allowed to make games that don't star white male protagonists, and are even being told not to put their non-lead female characters on the boxart.
 
W

wildfire

Banned
Interesting...

I disagreed with Sarkeesian's analysis about the Damsel in distress.

But by taking the time to make that video (along with observations of my niece) it helped me draw the conclusion that the "real" answer is that women are lacking characters that are active agents. Representations of damsels as women isn't inherently what could be having a negative effect on women in the social order. It's the lack of women as playable characters that weakens a woman's ability from feeling empowered through the game.

Ironically...

I didn't "Like" Sarkeesian's video nor subscribed to her channel. Her part 1 lacked a lot of analysis. It was mostly a presentation of facts.

But this person really took the time to deconstruct and offer reasonable counterarguements to Tropes vs Women. I didn't agree with quite a few things KiteTales said, such as Princess Peach not being an object to collect (I view Peach and Zelda very differently in this regard because Zelda has been a very active character in many games. Peach hasn't shined since the RPG) or her assertion that a person is brave waiting helplessly to being rescued.

There is bravery in staying out of a fight but staying close enough to give support to the point you can be harmed but that's not the type of waiting damsels in most videogames exhibit.


The one thing that pisses me off is how fast this video came out. Sure "Tropes vs Women" shows that more effort in research and interviews was being used considering the way she brought up the development of Star Fox Adventures but she also said this video is just part 1 of the Damsel in Distress chapter. It shouldn't be taking so long to publish parts of the same chapter.

I hope KiteTales keeps doing these videos, especially if "Tropes vs Women" keeps missing on delivering analysis in favor of just regurgitating and reporting past events.
 
S

Stet

Banned
Tylahedras said:
Cool you're assigning roles now? Can I be president?
Click to expand...

I'm not assigning anything. There's clearly a difference in how these two women have been treated, and that difference is in how they play their hands. Anita Sarkeesian upsets gamers because she criticizes gaming. KiteTales has responded to her videos to prove that there are some women out there who agree with gamers, and the response has been overwhelmingly positive. Based on her video, she won't have any complaints.
 
R

Relaxed Muscle

Member
Inanna said:
People that are calling Anita biased fail to see that people like this girl are also biased as well. They don't think sexism exist or that the portrayal of characters like Peach and Zelda is sexist because they grew up on these games, and love these characters and it is possible that they don't want to or can't see anyone talk about them in a negative way.

You just can't call one biased and not the other in the same breath!!
Click to expand...

Her Peach case is stretching, but in Zelda case her arguments are way more sounding. Biased or not. In the same way that some of Anita's arguments are strong too. The best is that you can see both videos and make your own opinion.
 
Nemesis_

Nemesis_

Member
I agree with the sentiment that she slightly misinterprets Anita's argument herself, but her approach is much more mature and it seems to be better balanced. I'm interested to see if she continues to put out responses as Anita's videos go online (when is the next one, btw, seems like it's taking forever).

I am also shocked/surprised to find a somewhat civil conversation happening on the comments on a fucking YouTube video.
There were a few shit comments, yes, but most of them seemed to be a proper discussion
.
 
T

Tylahedras

Banned
Htown said:
the funny thing about the whole "censoring artists isn't the solution" nonsense is that artists are currently being censored because they're usually not allowed to make games that don't star white male protagonists, and are even being told not to put their non-lead female characters on the boxart.
Click to expand...

Not getting to spend other people's money on whatever you want is not "censorship." They are free to spend their own money or their own time on games that promote female empowerment, gay rights, bullying or any other media inflated topic of the day.
 
R

Relaxed Muscle

Member
Htown said:
the funny thing about the whole "censoring artists isn't the solution" nonsense is that artists are currently being censored because they're usually not allowed to make games that don't star white male protagonists, and are even being told not to put their non-lead female characters on the boxart.
Click to expand...

And that's a problem and is bad, I'm not defending it. That's why it shouldn't be used for the contrary case.

Autors should be free to write games with female protagonists as they should be free to write more damsel in distress stories ( even better if they're done right). At they can.
 
H

Htown

STOP SHITTING ON MY MOTHER'S HEADSTONE
Tylahedras said:
Not getting to spend other people's money on whatever you want is not "censorship." They are free to spend their own money or their own time on games that promote female empowerment, gay rights, bullying or any other media inflated topic of the day.
Click to expand...

having a female protagonist is a "media inflated topic?"

are you even listening to yourself?
 
N

Not Spaceghost

Spaceghost
I really liked that video as a different interpretation, she was really calm and not trying to emotionally charge the issue, it was relaxing and enjoyable to watch while also being a cool new approach.

Jim Sterling said:
Wish I understood why it matters so much that Sarkeesian be "proven wrong." Her video's been out for a while, and the videogame industry has not burned to the ground.

People build her up like she's Sauron or something, but she's just a person with a video series. There are countless numbers of those. She's fine, and not a threat, and doesn't need to be so desperately torn down.
Click to expand...

It isn't that she needs to be proven wrong, it's that she needs to make her arguments factually strong and less based on emotional reaction and based more on actual evidence. To my knowledge there has never been a case where a females poor representation in video games has been detrimental to society, but if she were suddenly to pull out a statistic saying video game characters account for 77% of how people learn to perceive the other gender you might get a lot of people going OH SHIT THIS HAS TO CHANGE NOW!

She isn't being treated like Sauron she's just put herself in an awkward position where since she is the most vocal about this topic has accidentally made herself the de facto "expert", it's kind of unfortunate for her since she's being attacked like an expert which she is soooo far from one.

People will say that she is just trying to make bring light to a topic not many have any idea on, while that is admirable it also feel like an excuse for her lack of data or any real facts other than interpretations of what is happening in X game to Y character.

This wouldn't even be a difficult study to build, go to a local university put out an ad asking for 100 female gamers and 100 male gamers or something, show them cards of different characters and ask them if they felt like the character was a positive influence, neutral influence or a negative one. Studies like that are really cheap and easy to put together.
 
I

IHaveCandy

Banned
Anita's videos clearly show themselves to be agenda videos. She's got an agenda to strengthen, and all data will be used only to strengthen that agenda. It's more of a persuasive argument than a real study or comprehensive representation of women in games. I'm sure she will say she isn't done with her videos and will show more positive arguments, but her negative ones already show how biased it is.


There isn't anything wrong with her videos being persuasive arguments, she just shouldn't represent them as something else.
 
Nemesis_

Nemesis_

Member
Spaceghost said:
I really liked that video as a different interpretation, she was really calm and not trying to emotionally charge the issue, it was relaxing and enjoyable to watch while also being a cool new approach.
Click to expand...

The thing with Anita was that she was very confrontational with her approach. At first I was listening and just thought she was passionate so it came across as confrontational.

But I hate the way she sometimes articulates her words so poorly - I remember in the first TvW video she uses the words "regressive crap" and it just comes across as unprofessional and angry. That one line really rubbed me the wrong way for some reason >_> like, there are better ways to say thing especially when you've got so much publicity surrounding yourself and your project.
 
S

Sblargh

Banned
Nemesis_ said:
The thing with Anita was that she was very confrontational with her approach. At first I was listening and just thought she was passionate so it came across as confrontational.

But I hate the way she sometimes articulates her words so poorly - I remember in the first TvW video she uses the words "regressive crap" and it just comes across as unprofessional and angry. That one line really rubbed me the wrong way for some reason >_> like, there are better ways to say thing especially when you've got so much publicity surrounding yourself and your project.
Click to expand...

But she is confronting something.
It's a video asking you to smile, be happy, there's nothing wrong with anything and, literally, urging another person to not upset her viewers and be always positive against a video attempting to show multiple examples of something bad going on.

It is like saying that footage of slaughterhouses could learn something from McDonald's commercials.
 
S

SolidSnakex

Member
Htown said:
the funny thing about the whole "censoring artists isn't the solution" nonsense is that artists are currently being censored because they're usually not allowed to make games that don't star white male protagonists, and are even being told not to put their non-lead female characters on the boxart.
Click to expand...

Is there anyone okay with that form of censorship but have been critical of what's being discussed here? People criticized 2K and Irrational heavily for removing Elizabeth from the front of BI's boxart. And focus groups, the people that can influence devs to make unnecessary changes, are looked down on by many gamers. I think most gamers would like it if developers were allowed to make the games that they wanted. That's why Kickstarter has taken off. Developers can get their original visions funded without having to compromise to a publishers demands.
 
K

KidGalactus

Member
Jim Sterling said:
Wish I understood why it matters so much that Sarkeesian be "proven wrong." Her video's been out for a while, and the videogame industry has not burned to the ground.

People build her up like she's Sauron or something, but she's just a person with a video series. There are countless numbers of those. She's fine, and not a threat, and doesn't need to be so desperately torn down.
Click to expand...

She isn't trying to prove Anita Sarkeesian wrong. She says so several times.
Her angle is that Sarkeesian's video incomplete, or disingenuous in places. She is offering an alternative (while not altogether opposing) point of view.

Watch the video.
 
I

Inanna

Not pure anymore!
KidGalactus said:
She isn't trying to prove Anita Sarkeesian wrong. She says so several times.
Her angle is that Sarkeesian's video incomplete, or disingenuous in places. She is offering an alternative (while not altogether opposing) point of view.

Watch the video.
Click to expand...

Well, I dunno it did seem polar opposite to me.
 
W

wildfire

Banned
KidGalactus said:
She isn't trying to prove Anita Sarkeesian wrong.
Click to expand...

Yes she is as well as isn't. Regardless that isn't as important as what could be taken away from these discussions and how we apply it what we do. While I find Sarkeesian's work to be inferior to Kitgirl I found her to be more influential on what I would do to address gender issues. Her misfiring and misrepresentation has spurred more critical thinking.
 
F

faceless007

Member
IHaveCandy said:
There isn't anything wrong with her videos being persuasive arguments, she just shouldn't represent them as something else.
Click to expand...

Where did she do that?

The idea this this response is "more balanced" than Anita's is pretty funny: she spends the vast majority of time discussing Zelda and Peach (or rather, the surface level traits of the characters that rarely ever matter to the game's plots), followed by a montage of other examples to support her position (most of which are more obscure than Anita's). In other words, it's exactly the same argument structurally as Anita's, just with a wildly different interpretation and different examples. It's not more well-supported than Anita's; it's roughly equivalently supported. But the way she makes and presents her argument is almost identical, so it's kind of absurd to me that the presentation and structure of hers can be held up as any better.

But of course, everything that agrees with me = accurate and objective while everything that disagrees with me = biased and one-sided.
 
J

jay

Member
KidGalactus said:
She isn't trying to prove Anita Sarkeesian wrong. She says so several times.
Click to expand...

Seems clear to me that despite her saying this, she is more often than not arguing in direct opposition to Anita. My biased view is there is a chance she deliberately claims she isn't arguing because she is aware of how well the internet takes women making passionate arguments about this topic.
 
B

Box

Member
I'm getting the feeling that people who are finding this to be such a great video are ignoring some of the weaker parts of the argument.

There's a part where she counters what's happening in the real world analysis of the story with what's happening in the fictional world. She says that Mario and Link aren't just benefiting their story arc by saving the princess, but that they're doing it to save the kingdom. Then she says that Peach and Zelda aren't treated like property by the story, because the characters in the story don't view her as property.

But her voice is so sweet and she's being really nice to "gamers" (for the lack of a better word) that you can kind of ignore the fact that those counterpoints don't really make sense.

That's not my point though. What I find more interesting is how, with this topic more than any other I've seen, people's interpretations of an argument can be so different. They say that you're initial attitude about an argument will affect which parts of it you remember. They say you tend to remember the strong parts of arguments that support your attitude and weak parts of arguments that oppose it. They say your brain actually filters out the arguments that challenge your attitude so you never really listen to them or get a chance to consider them.

I wonder if that's what happens with discussions like these. There seem to be huge disagreements about which arguments are strong and which arguments are weak.
 
A

APF

Member
Relaxed Muscle said:
You said "There's still prize-winning going on" = Wrong in Zelda case.
Click to expand...
No, it's correct to various levels depending on the game in question.

Relaxed Muscle said:
And that "shitty boring cliche that plays on our historically-influenced perceptions of female vulnerability and objectification" = which is wrong in Zelda case
Click to expand...
You're making an assertion not a counter-argument.

Relaxed Muscle said:
Rescuing Zelda is not a prize-winning, and neither she is vulnerable or an objectification, she has a key role in the plot and strong in her own way.
Click to expand...
You're making an assertion not a counter-argument. And you're picking apart pieces of sentences vs discussing my point. And you accuse me of being shortsighted and biased? Look in the mirror.

Relaxed Muscle said:
What's more, in TP Link is totally in the hands of a female who dosn't doubt to scorn the hero in every moment.
Click to expand...
Incoherent and irrelevant, characters providing "scorn" has nothing to do with anything.

Relaxed Muscle said:
So as long Dimsel in Distress dosn't fall in the vulnerability and objefication and it's more that a prize winning thing to fill male fantasies is not wrong using it.
Click to expand...
Absurd question begging. You're honestly not getting the entire point of demonstrating the historic and sociological pattern, which was a focus of the video this was responding to.

Relaxed Muscle said:
You're idea of the whole deal is shortsighted and biased
Click to expand...
So you make these direct attacks against me (instead of the argument I'm making), and then cry when I call you out on it? Again, look in the mirror.

Relaxed Muscle said:
Also censoring autors is not the solution.
Click to expand...
Seriously? Why are you hallucinating that I called for censoring when all I said was I want better, less insulting stories? You're a piece of work.
 
F

faceless007

Member
KidGalactus said:
She isn't trying to prove Anita Sarkeesian wrong. She says so several times.
Her angle is that Sarkeesian's video incomplete, or disingenuous in places. She is offering an alternative (while not altogether opposing) point of view.

Watch the video.
Click to expand...

This sort of gets to the question of what is the whole point of analytic criticism in the first place, which is something I struggle with myself. But it comes down to this:

Either

1) Two contradictory readings of a work can both be correct, or
2) Given two contradictory readings of a work, at most one can be correct, and the other must be incorrect.

If you believe that this video is "just an alternate viewpoint," then you're basically saying (1) and it doesn't matter who's right and who's wrong--they're both right (or at least, both can be). So there's no point presenting this as a "reply" to Anita since all it can do, at most, is give an alternate take, but not one that's more objectively correct than Anita's. This can't be a better argument than Anita's, just a different one. I'd be surprised if anyone in this thread really believes that. Certainly the OP doesn't.

Or, more likely, this video is trying to provide not just an alternate take, but a more valid one, which by extension makes Anita's less valid and therefore wrong. Which is certainly how most people who post this reply seem to hold it up.
 
E

erpg

GAF parliamentarian
jay said:
Aren't you biasing things by deciding what you are going to study? You lend sexism, racism, whatever credence by assuming it's an actual thing that can be looked for, no? Or would every test begin assuming these ideas may not exist in real life?

The issue I see is you seem to not want people to talk about the sexism they see until we all wait patiently for a scientist to give us research results. Or we can talk about it until people like to hear us talk, then we have to stop.
Click to expand...
I think you're taking too much of a skeptical approach here and you're really having a fun time taking riding a slippery slope with my arguments. Science isn't about acting like an idiot and grasping at straws, hoping you get to study something that is relevant. And again:

Lyphen said:
I simply don't think Sarkeesian is the right person to provide the view I would want (as unbiased as possible).
Click to expand...
Lyphen said:
Properly researching it and putting certain methods in place to prevent an obvious bias (I'm not expecting Sarkeesian to do a full scientific study here), would've suited the entire discussion on sexism in videogames a lot better, which goes back to this post:
Click to expand...

...

Lyphen said:
And I don't really know how got to the second part.
Click to expand...
 
U

unbias

Member
Fun video to watch, puts a positive perspective on the same thins Anita finds to be bad. Not really a direct rebuttal about Anita's video though, all it really does it question Anita's intent. The most accurate reason, imo, why Anita is so polarizing is because you either have her view on the world or you have a view of gender equality something closer to something like this. The 2 will never really see eye to eye, imo, because of how they start the discussion, and I think the difference is enough where there will never be an acceptance between the 2 for the most part.
 
A

APF

Member
The weird thing in reading so many of the complaints about her rabid feminism is that not having watched anything but her latest tropes video, in it she came across as measured and fairly dispassionate / not wanting to criticize gaming or gamers, and really only discussing examples and the trope's historical significance. This is why so many other complaints are re: "this is nothing new" and "all she did is list examples." In the video at least, there was no "us vs them" at all.
 
R

Relaxed Muscle

Member
APF said:
No, it's correct to various levels depending on the game in question.

So it's not correct always? thanks with agreeing with me

You're making an assertion not a counter-argument.

The argument is on several of other of my post including my first answer, I'm not going repeat myself

You're making an assertion not a counter-argument. And you're picking apart pieces of sentences vs discussing my point. And you accuse me of being shortsighted and biased? Look in the mirror.

Same as above

Incoherent and irrelevant, characters providing "scorn" has nothing to do with anything.

A female character proving scorn of the hero/player it's positive because while using the dimsel in distress cliche you can create situations where the hero is totally dependant of a woman, so it has to do with something...

Absurd question begging. You're honestly not getting the entire point of demonstrating the historic and sociological pattern, which was a focus of the video this was responding to.

Whatever the dimsel in distress was used in other works, dosn't mean that videogames(or any other media) is portraying all female characters that fit into the trope as weak and powerless, and much less is a general vision of females in those games, at least not as irrefutable norm. Some cases fall into that historic and sociological pattern others not. Anita provided cases in which not and still put them in the same bag. Which is the point of the video in the OP, which I partially agree

So you make these direct attacks against me (instead of the argument I'm making), and then cry when I call you out on it? Again, look in the mirror.

I'm calling you biased because that's what your argument makes you look, if you think is attacking to you, sorry, I don't consider it an insult. Your argument is a stern rule that is simply not true. That's is all.

Seriously? Why are you hallucinating that I called for censoring when all I said was I want better, less insulting stories? You're a piece of work.

You want better plot but you won't let authors use a certain trope, because is insulting. How is that not close to censoring?, is not different as publishers asking male protagonists.
Click to expand...

.
 
F

Fugu

Member
Relaxed Muscle said:
You said "There's still prize-winning going on" = Wrong in Zelda case.
Click to expand...
I'm just going to remove this as an argument.
Beware of Zelda spoilers.
I haven't played every Zelda game; if it's missing, I didn't beat it.

The Legend of Zelda: Seems to only be at the end of the game, no relevance at all to anyone before that. Pretty obviously a damsel in this game.
Adventure of Link: Is she even in this game?
Link to the Past: Opens some doors for you, talks to you when you get a crystal. Spends most of the game hiding or gone. She's a damsel here too.
Link's Awakening: Absent.
Ocarina of Time: Complicated. She's introduced as a powerful character and is initially saved by another woman. She spends most of the game cosplaying as a man but seems powerful as that man, but gets kidnapped back as a woman near the end of the game (why did Ganondorf wait?). In the finale, she seems about as useful as Link does, so there's that. I would not consider her portrayal in OoT to be a portrayal of a damsel in distress.
Wind Waker: Also complicated. She starts out the game as a character that's probably altogether more useful than Link. Once she gets princess'd, however, she loses all of her personality (and even her name). She also gets kidnapped and seems to only do anything at all at the absolute end of the game. There are some other tropes at play here, such as the notion that a powerful woman must necessarily be a manly one. If she weren't so brutally segmented into two characters in this game I would say that there's an argument that she's not a damsel, but her portrayal in the second half speaks volumes.
Twilight Princess: She's barely even a character in this game. As far as I can remember, her only appearance as an actor in this game is in the finale. Pretty straightforward damsel.
Skyward Sword: Damsel plus potential wife all rolled into one. This might be the most prototypical display of the damsel within the Zelda franchise, and it's also the most recent.

Of the games I've mentioned, you've got four for "damsel", one for "debatable" (Wind Waker), and one for "not damsel" (Ocarina of Time). As far as I can remember, she's absent from the other two.
Even if you believe that she's not a damsel in Wind Waker, that means she's a damsel in two-thirds of the games that she appears in.

Maybe she's a big fucking hero in Majora's Mask and that's why you believe that there's any room for debate here, but I really doubt that's it. Why? Because I've played a lot of Zelda games, and her most notable character trait is that she gets kidnapped.
 
R

Relaxed Muscle

Member
Fugu said:
Maybe she's a big fucking hero in Majora's Mask and that's why you believe that there's any room for debate here, but I really doubt that's it. Why? Because I've played a lot of Zelda games, and her most notable character trait is that she gets kidnapped.
Click to expand...


Needing being rescued dosn't mean she's inherently poweless and neither she's a prize. She's is not the prize of the hero that will marry him just because you rescue her (well I didn play SS so I can't speak for that). She is needed to save the world, she's powerful in her own way. A lot of Zelda games has basically zero caracterization of her, but that dosn't mean that in the lore of the saga she plays a key part on the hero objective or that she wears a part of the triforce.
 
G

gabbo

Member
Fugu said:
I'm just going to remove this as an argument.
Beware of Zelda spoilers.
I haven't played every Zelda game; if it's missing, I didn't beat it.

The Legend of Zelda: Seems to only be at the end of the game, no relevance at all to anyone before that. Pretty obviously a damsel in this game.
Adventure of Link: Is she even in this game?
Link to the Past: Opens some doors for you, talks to you when you get a crystal. Spends most of the game hiding or gone. She's a damsel here too.
Link's Awakening: Absent.
Ocarina of Time: Complicated. She's introduced as a powerful character and is initially saved by another woman. She spends most of the game cosplaying as a man but seems powerful as that man, but gets kidnapped back as a woman near the end of the game (why did Ganondorf wait?). In the finale, she seems about as useful as Link does, so there's that. I would not consider her portrayal in OoT to be a portrayal of a damsel in distress.
Wind Waker: Also complicated. She starts out the game as a character that's probably altogether more useful than Link. Once she gets princess'd, however, she loses all of her personality (and even her name). She also gets kidnapped and seems to only do anything at all at the absolute end of the game. There are some other tropes at play here, such as the notion that a powerful woman must necessarily be a manly one. If she weren't so brutally segmented into two characters in this game I would say that there's an argument that she's not a damsel, but her portrayal in the second half speaks volumes.
Twilight Princess: She's barely even a character in this game. As far as I can remember, her only appearance as an actor in this game is in the finale. Pretty straightforward damsel.
Skyward Sword: Damsel plus potential wife all rolled into one. This might be the most prototypical display of the damsel within the Zelda franchise, and it's also the most recent.

Of the games I've mentioned, you've got four for "damsel", one for "debatable" (Wind Waker), and one for "not damsel" (Ocarina of Time). As far as I can remember, she's absent from the other two.
Even if you believe that she's not a damsel in Wind Waker, that means she's a damsel in two-thirds of the games that she appears in.

Maybe she's a big fucking hero in Majora's Mask and that's why you believe that there's any room for debate here, but I really doubt that's it. Why? Because I've played a lot of Zelda games, and her most notable character trait is that she gets kidnapped.
Click to expand...

But she brings peace back to the kingdom when Link rescues her, and she's loved by her people. Thus, she's not a damsel?
 
F

Fugu

Member
Relaxed Muscle said:
Being a damnsel dosn't mean she's inherently poweless and neither she's a prize. She's is not the prize of the hero that will marry him just because you rescue her (well I didn play SS so I can't speak for that). She is needed to save the world, she's powerful in her own way. A lot of Zelda games has basically zero caracterization of her, but that dosn't mean that in the lore of the saga she plays a key part on the hero objective or that she wears a part of the triforce.
Click to expand...

gabbo said:
But she brings peace back to the kingdom when Link rescues her, and she's loved by her people. Thus, she's not a damsel?
Click to expand...
How do her actions after the game is over (that you never see because every Zelda game saves before the end sequence anyway) affect how players perceive her ability as an actor within the game?
 
A

APF

Member
Relaxed Muscle said:
So it's not correct always? thanks with agreeing with me
Click to expand...
No, it's correct and to various levels depending on the game in question.

Relaxed Muscle said:
The argument is on several of other of my post including my first answer, I'm not going repeat myself
Click to expand...
No, you're just making assertions and not a counter-argument.

Relaxed Muscle said:
A female character proving scorn of the hero/player it's positive because while using the dimsel in distress cliche you can create situations where the hero is totally dependant of a woman, so it has to do with something...
Click to expand...
Incoherent and irrelevant, and again completely misses my original argument. You're just flailing around with red herrings because you don't want to actually discuss the point: the existence of "b" doesn't invalidate the fact of "a." Having Barrett insult Cloud does not eliminate how embarrassing he was characterized.

Relaxed Muscle said:
Whatever the dimsel in distress was used in other works, dosn't mean that videogames(or any other media) is portraying all female characters that fit into the trope as weak and powerless
Click to expand...
Why are you arguing for willful ignorance, deliberately refusing to look at the historical and sociological patterns just because you have some irrational fear of reality?

Relaxed Muscle said:
Some cases fall into that historic and sociological pattern others not. Anita provided cases in which not and still put them in the same bag.
Click to expand...
They all "fall into that pattern" regardless of whether they're written well or written poorly, regardless of whether it's justified by the story, regardless of whether they're otherwise characterized in a positive way. That's the point of using the trope in the first place, as an easy way of triggering emotional responses in the player. Otherwise, "Hyrule is in danger" would be sufficient motivation for a hero.

Relaxed Muscle said:
I'm calling you biased because that's what your argument makes you look
Click to expand...
You're not even really discussing my arguments, so you're not really in a position to say that--you're just projecting. What does that say about the objectivity of your own posts?

Relaxed Muscle said:
You want better plot but you won't let authors use a certain trope, because is insulting. How is that not close to censoring?, is not different as publishers asking male protagonists.
Click to expand...
Incoherent. How dare I want better writing in games!! That's censorship! As stated by other posters, I'm not the one forcing developers into doing anything. You asked me to be less "aggressive" when responding to your attacks. Is that not therefore you trying to censor me? How dare you.
 
U

unbias

Member
Fugu said:
How do her actions after the game is over (that you never see because every Zelda game saves before the end sequence anyway) affect how players perceive her ability as an actor within the game?
Click to expand...

Are you saying you know how everyone perceives Zelda? I mean, I don't know how many people seriously think of Zelda as a weak character(dont really think of her at all, beyond saving the princess in a castle).
 
F

Fugu

Member
unbias said:
Are you saying you know how everyone perceives Zelda? I mean, I don't know how many people seriously think of Zelda as a weak character(dont really think of her at all, beyond saving the princess in a castle).
Click to expand...
How is that better? Her name is in the fucking title and this is all she gets. She doesn't even get "secondary female" billing, she gets "object" billing.
 
U

unbias

Member
APF said:
Exactly the point of the tropes video.
Click to expand...

Huh? I veiw her like that because I'm not much of a fan of the Zelda series(LTTP was the only one I really liked) I find the story horrible and the only real draw is the gameplay. I was just speaking for myself though, I wasnt implying everyone thinks like me. Are you saying Anita assumes everyone plays the game with the same mindset as me?
 
U

unbias

Member
Fugu said:
How is that better? Her name is in the fucking title and this is all she gets. She doesn't even get "secondary female" billing, she gets "object" billing.
Click to expand...

You realize Zelda games stories are horrible and barely there, right? I mean, outside of outright gameplay, there really isnt anything there to do with her. Zelda stories are near non-existent. Link, you could barely call "human", he is silent, unless he is screaming he has near 0 agency as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The Queen is back. Polygon: The Anita Sarkeesian Story, 10 Years of Feminist Frequency
Clickbait 2 3 4 5
207
24K
Animagic replied
  • Locked
RUMOR: NX more powerful than PS4, Splatoon/Mario Maker ports in development
162 163 164 165 166
8K
1M
ModBot replied
  • Locked
Destiny - 1 Year On, Looking back at cut content
6 7 8 9 10
452
58K
ModBot replied
D.I.C.E. Summit 2015 (Feb. 4-5) - Live streamed via Twitch (9:30 am to 5/9.30 pm PST)
36
5K
SteveO409 replied
  • Locked
Let's talk John Carpenter / Carpenter 101
2 3 4 5
229
30K
Fancy Clown replied
Top Bottom