Support NeoGAF

[polyh3dron]

It deals with sex and relationships in a very strong sophisticated manner and all it has to say is that cheating is bad? It's a shallow message underneath the real product, which is Catherine. Regardless of the actual content of the story or gameplay the box alone is pure objectification. Men are literally climbing over her overly exposed body parts for absolutely no fucking reason but to excite immature gamers who's interest and buying power is actually peeked by that.

What you're doing right here is exactly what Anita did with Bayonetta and is also what I expect her to be doing for the rest of this series. You know nothing of the game if you think those men are "climbing" all over her. They're freefalling in a nightmare world they're stuck in. You're like Donnie saying "I am the Walrus" after overhearing Walter talking about "what Lenin said".

 

[idlethreats]

What you're doing right here is exactly what Anita did with Bayonetta and is also what I expect her to be doing for the rest of this series. You know nothing of the game if you think those men are "climbing" all over her. They're freefalling in a nightmare world they're stuck in. You're like Donnie saying "I am the Walrus" after overhearing Walter talking about "what Lenin said".

They were talking about the box art there, not the gameplay. On the 360 cover Vincent is clearly scaling Katherine in fear.

 

[Kinyou]

Unrelated to video 1 but I hope she touches on the facebook event where they let you vote for your dream FemShep for the cover.

Was that considered problematic? It's not like fans voted on her boob sizes. They just wanted to play it safe and actually let the players choose what the standard femshep should look like.

When you call that sexist then so is every character creator in videogames where you can built your dream woman if you wanted to.

 

[polyh3dron]

They were talking about the box art there, not the gameplay. On the 360 cover Vincent is clearly scaling Katherine in fear.

Yes, in fear of the nightmare world he is in and of this gigantic version of Katherine that wants to kill him. Not for no reason.

 

[Platy]

I'm responding to her inclusion of Zelda on her whiteboard list. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but she doesn't seem to have gone into any real detail about how she's going to be presenting her arguments. I don't see her explaining the specifics of what her criticism will entail on her Kickstarter page/video, so I'm curious as to where she mentioned that she won't be criticising specific games, as you say? I'd find it a bit counter productive to list a load of specific games if she's not going to be criticising them.

I never said she would not criticise specific games, but she already said lots of time that most tropes are not bad per see, the problem is the overusing.

If there was only ONE game that treats women as insanely idiot, weak and dependant women, we would think that THAT woman is idiot weak and dependant.... but with 95% of games doing that it pass an IDEA (wich can be passed, to the contrary of an action, for those comparing violence and this) that society sees EVERY women as idiot, weak and dependant

 

[idlethreats]

Yes, in fear of the nightmare world he is in and of this gigantic version of Katherine that wants to kill him. Not for no reason.

The gigantic K/Catherines on the box art don't appear to want to kill Vincent - they appear coquettish and inviting to the player. I don't deny that the box art does somewhat reflect the game's themes and gameplay, but I think you're being willfully naive if you don't think that they were primarily designed the way they are in order to titillate and move units based on a "sex sells" marketing strategy. Several people who played and enjoyed Catherine felt that the way the game was marketed and packaged did a disservice to the game by overemphasizing sex to the point where uninformed gamers might not realize that there was a serious game underneath. This isn't some new, unfounded argument that the junior is automatically wrong about just because they haven't played the game.

 

[mrklaw]

Her lego video is terrible. Shallow, simplistic argument that 'Lego thinks girls like pink', when it would have been relatively simple to find out from lego the lengths they went to to research the friends line. Or the way they are designed with more detailed interiors than other sets to support role play. Instead it's just criticism of a pastel palette and minifigs with boobs

 

[Vino]

I never said she would not criticise specific games, but she already said lots of time that most tropes are not bad per see, the problem is the overusing.

If there was only ONE game that treats women as insanely idiot, weak and dependant women, we would think that THAT woman is idiot weak and dependant.... but with 95% of games doing that it pass an IDEA (wich can be passed, to the contrary of an action, for those comparing violence and this) that society sees EVERY women as idiot, weak and dependant

In most games everyone except the main character is idiot, weak and dependant, thats not exclusive to women.

 

[spons]

Didn't she tunnel all the criticism on her opinions to a single youtube video by blocking comments on all the others, then saying she got a shitload of angry people all over her? Looking forward to her video nonetheless because I'm very interested in how she's going to spin harmless 'tropes' into anti-female rhetoric.

 

[Metal Gear?!]

Didn't she tunnel all the criticism on her opinions to a single youtube video by blocking comments on all the others, then saying she got a shitload of angry people all over her? Looking forward to her video nonetheless because I'm very interested in how she's going to spin harmless 'tropes' into anti-female rhetoric.

Ah yes harmless* tropes.

*everything not directed at me personally must naturally be harmless to all

In most games everyone except the main character is idiot, weak and dependant, thats not exclusive to women.

So given that, in how many games is the main character a woman?

Idea 1. Games Promote Violence: WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG
Idea 2. Games Promote Sexism: BRAVO ANITA! YOU TELL 'EM! DAMN THOSE SEXY NERDS!

Idea 1. Games Promote Actions
Idea 2. Games Promote Attitudes

I think you can see the false equivalency there.

If you changed the question to what kind of attitudes about violence do videogames promote, what do you think the answer might be?

Can someone explain why this was actually funded? Beyond the shit storm and beyond all the drama, this program will not bring any insight into anything video game related because it simply doesn't have complex enough structures to support such critiques. I'm obviously hoping to be proven wrong, but this simply has no chance of being good enough to warrant such insane investment.

You've obviously not hoping to be proven wrong given you already know that "it simply doesn't have complex enough structures to support such critiques." Please tell us more you already know, given you are one of our few fonts of insider information.

 

[Wolves Evolve]

So one of the common points in this - let's be generous and call it a discussion - is that Anita is automatically going to fail because games can't possibly promote sexism / no more than other media / whats the big deal anyway.

As a gamer over 30 who has been online for over 20 years, I've never found game culture to be as anti-feminist and socially conservative as it is now. I'm much more concerned by this turn than by a single example / event / controversy. Maybe its the broadening number of young people with more reactionary opinions, but nobody seems able to discuss anything without the vuvuzelas of 'whats the big deal anyway' coming in to reinforce the idea that:

- Games don't have a sexism problem
- If they do, games aren't as bad as tv / film
- If they're as bad as tv / film, it doesn't matter
- It doesn't matter because of REASONS

Even ten years ago, I really don't recall these virulent reactions to the discussions, even if the discussions still had dissenters from the socially conservative end who had fair points to bring up. But nobody these days raises much of anything.

 

[Station42]

So one of the common points in this - let's be generous and call it a discussion - is that Anita is automatically going to fail because games can't possibly promote sexism / no more than other media / whats the big deal anyway.

As a gamer over 30 who has been online for over 20 years, I've never found game culture to be as anti-feminist and socially conservative as it is now. I'm much more concerned by this turn than by a single example / event / controversy. Maybe its the broadening number of young people with more reactionary opinions, but nobody seems able to discuss anything without the vuvuzelas of 'whats the big deal anyway' coming in to reinforce the idea that:

- Games don't have a sexism problem
- If they do, games aren't as bad as tv / film
- If they're as bad as tv / film, it doesn't matter
- It doesn't matter because of REASONS

Even ten years ago, I really don't recall these virulent reactions to the discussions, even if the discussions still had dissenters from the socially conservative end who had fair points to bring up. But nobody these days raises much of anything.

Very well said.

 

[akidnamededdy]

So one of the common points in this - let's be generous and call it a discussion - is that Anita is automatically going to fail because games can't possibly promote sexism / no more than other media / whats the big deal anyway.

As a gamer over 30 who has been online for over 20 years, I've never found game culture to be as anti-feminist and socially conservative as it is now. I'm much more concerned by this turn than by a single example / event / controversy. Maybe its the broadening number of young people with more reactionary opinions, but nobody seems able to discuss anything without the vuvuzelas of 'whats the big deal anyway' coming in to reinforce the idea that:

- Games don't have a sexism problem
- If they do, games aren't as bad as tv / film
- If they're as bad as tv / film, it doesn't matter
- It doesn't matter because of REASONS

Even ten years ago, I really don't recall these virulent reactions to the discussions, even if the discussions still had dissenters from the socially conservative end who had fair points to bring up. But nobody these days raises much of anything.

I think the more common opinion is not that these problems don't exist, but that Anita is somehow incapable of tackling the issue in a meaningful way.

We'll find out next month I guess. Maybe

 

[B-Genius]

So one of the common points in this - let's be generous and call it a discussion - is that Anita is automatically going to fail because games can't possibly promote sexism / no more than other media / whats the big deal anyway.

As a gamer over 30 who has been online for over 20 years, I've never found game culture to be as anti-feminist and socially conservative as it is now. I'm much more concerned by this turn than by a single example / event / controversy. Maybe its the broadening number of young people with more reactionary opinions, but nobody seems able to discuss anything without the vuvuzelas of 'whats the big deal anyway' coming in to reinforce the idea that:

- Games don't have a sexism problem
- If they do, games aren't as bad as tv / film
- If they're as bad as tv / film, it doesn't matter
- It doesn't matter because of REASONS

Even ten years ago, I really don't recall these virulent reactions to the discussions, even if the discussions still had dissenters from the socially conservative end who had fair points to bring up. But nobody these days raises much of anything.

As eddy says, the majority of mature gamers will not argue with you when you say there's a problem.

The difficult (and much more important part) is not telling people there's a problem and that it needs fixing - you might as well say modern society/certain cultures as a whole need fixing. It's helping people who are "stuck in their ways" understand what can be done right.

Many have said in the past, it's much more productive to talk about the positives, and focus on examples in the medium that promote a healthy attitude towards sexism, violent behaviour, or any real social issue at hand.

Personally, I have nothing against Anita, and I don't think anyone should. But it's these people who don't know how to express themselves or tackle the issues properly who have the loudest voice, and make it out to be some anti-feminist movement (because their beloved artform/hobby is being targeted). They do this because she's only focusing on the negatives, which would make her nothing more than a critic. She seems to want to enjoy a future of games where these issues are addressed properly, but people can't see towards that due to her approach.

 

[GamerSoul]

As eddy says, the majority of mature gamers will not argue with you when you say there's a problem.

The difficult (and much more important part) is not telling people there's a problem and that it needs fixing - you might as well say modern society/certain cultures as a whole need fixing. It's helping people who are "stuck in their ways" understand what can be done right.

Many have said in the past, it's much more productive to talk about the positives, and focus on examples in the medium that promote a healthy attitude towards sexism, violent behaviour, or any real social issue at hand.

Personally, I have nothing against Anita, and I don't think anyone should. But it's these people who don't know how to express themselves or tackle the issues properly who have the loudest voice, and make it out to be some anti-feminist movement (because their beloved artform/hobby is being targeted). They do this because she's only focusing on the negatives, which would make her nothing more than a critic. She seems to want to enjoy a future of games where these issues are addressed properly, but people can't see towards that due to her approach.

I think you and Wolves made good points. And I also agree and wish she would also look at the positive examples that are out there. And like you said there is a social component to it that's important and also, imo, a business side to it.

 

[Grand Funk Carwash]

Idea 1. Games Promote Actions
Idea 2. Games Promote Attitudes

I think you can see the false equivalency there.

If you changed the question to what kind of attitudes about violence do videogames promote, what do you think the answer might be?

Games promote violence as a(the) solution to problems. How is that not an attitude? They encourage the adversarial - kill or be killed.

 

[cutmeamango]

She better release this video before the week of the 20th, don't want to see all the delicious discussion being smothered to death by PS4 topics.

 

[bigboss370]

She better release this video before the week of the 20th, don't want to see all the delicious discussion being smothered to death by PS4 topics.

lol came to the thread to post exactly this. next gen locomotive is coming, and she's in danger of being run over.

 

[jimi_dini]

Sex sells, and companies tell you how to be sexy (by of course, buying their products).

I just found this here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2K0eRtLeFiM

I guess it's supposed to sell Ghost Recon Future Soldier. First thing I did was do a massive facepalm. At least there is one positive thing about this video - look at the thumbs up/thumbs down - it seems there is hope. The PR dude at UbiSoft that created this piece of crap should get fired. If I would have seen this before purchasing Future Soldier, I would have definitely never ever bought Future Soldier.

 

[Platy]

Sexism sells

fixed

 

[stolin]

Dave Chappelle - Chivalry Is Dead

 

[Eidan]

Her lego video is terrible. Shallow, simplistic argument that 'Lego thinks girls like pink', when it would have been relatively simple to find out from lego the lengths they went to to research the friends line. Or the way they are designed with more detailed interiors than other sets to support role play. Instead it's just criticism of a pastel palette and minifigs with boobs

Her argument was much more than "Friends is bad because it's pink".

 

[Lime]

Her lego video is terrible. Shallow, simplistic argument that 'Lego thinks girls like pink', when it would have been relatively simple to find out from lego the lengths they went to to research the friends line. Or the way they are designed with more detailed interiors than other sets to support role play. Instead it's just criticism of a pastel palette and minifigs with boobs

Part 1: http://thesocietypages.org/socimage...istorical-perspective-on-the-lego-gender-gap/

Part 2: http://thesocietypages.org/socimage...istorical-perspective-on-the-lego-gender-gap/

 

[akidnamededdy]

So this is an interesting read.

http://www.the-spearhead.com/2013/0...-video-this-month-but-who-is-she-working-for/

In a screen grab of a gamer discussion posted on Mundane Matt’s Tumblr, an anonymous commenter responds to a question about what EA and Sarkeesian’s cooperation is all about. According to the commenter, she has been paid to praise a game called “Battlefield 4,” and to declare it feminist friendly. Her job is to provide political cover and perhaps bring in a few female gamers.

This may or may not be true, but there’s little doubt that Sarkeesian is in fact working for EA, which is an enormous company with billions in revenue. This being the case, how could she possibly give her Kickstarter backers an objective critique of sexism in video games?

I searched and didn't see a reference to this here yet, so sorry if old.

I've been saying all along that I don't think Anita's the person to tackle this issue, and here we have a reason why.

EDIT: Weird, the article is new but the links in it are old. I...get the feeling I'm about to be reamed for this.

Thoughts?

 

[pargonta]

i think it's disingenuous to say she works for EA, she did have that presentation with DICE, but everything else seems fabricated. i think it's wise not to jump down the conspiracy theory rabbit hole.

 

[Baconsammy]

So this is an interesting read.

http://www.the-spearhead.com/2013/0...-video-this-month-but-who-is-she-working-for/

I think it's amusing that they claim Anita called it 'feminist friendly' when a great many feminists view Anita's views as 'feminist unfriendly'. Not sure that label means much of anything.

 

[akidnamededdy]

i think it's disingenuous to say she works for EA, she did have that presentation with DICE, but everything else seems fabricated. i think it's wise not to jump down the conspiracy theory rabbit hole.

Ehh, I suppose you're right, but I'll still be scrutinizing her findings a lot more carefully now. With everything that's happened lately regarding games journalism, people are going to be wary of perceived conflicts of interest.

 

[faceless007]

Well, for starters, that would have more credibility if it weren't coming from a disgruntled MRA blog that thinks that meta-damsel-in-distress point is actually clever. But I decided to keep reading. The original source for the claim seems to be this Destructoid blog which is...not well written, to put it mildly, and doesn't provide any sources. Even if it's true, it's not clear how much of her supposed directions to DICE and EA's orders is real and how much of it is the author projecting and taking things out of context. Certainly I would hope for a better source for these claims that EA is hell-bent on fixing sexism in the industry and went about it in the most circuitous, obscure, ineffective way possible than the borderline incoherent stream-of-consciousness rambling of a Destructoid blogger and a screengrab of a 4chan thread. They can't even keep the story straight; was she hired to make Mirror's Edge 2 more female-friendly or Battlefield and Medal of Honor?

If Sarkeesian has indeed been hired as a consultant by EA, she absolutely has a responsibility to disclose that in her finished project, and it will definitely cast a pall if she makes any positive comments about EA games past or future. But I don't necessarily see that as inherently invalidating the entire project, unless you think being hired as a consultant to try to fix a problem automatically makes one unfit to address that problem, which seems to be the logic that blog is making.

 

[jimi_dini]

Part 1: http://thesocietypages.org/socimage...istorical-perspective-on-the-lego-gender-gap/

Part 2: http://thesocietypages.org/socimage...istorical-perspective-on-the-lego-gender-gap/

Uh oh my god.

The gender stuff isn't even the worst. Just look at those sets. Those are not LEGOs anymore. LEGOs were tons of bricks, which you could use to build anything you like. Anything you imagined. Which was a great thing.

For me the only real LEGOs are the ones from 1978-1988. The stuff that was released after that is just shit.

That guy should have researched it even more and included sales figures. I would really be interested who came up with that crap and why. Maybe those "sets" sell better, idk.

To me those sets from 1989 onwards look like videogames today. Dumbed down.

 

[Funchameleon]

Hmm yes what has this thread been up to? An earnest link to a wholesale MRA blog? Interesting.

 

[akidnamededdy]

Hmm yes what has this thread been up to? An earnest link to a wholesale MRA blog? Interesting.

Call it what you will (for the record, I didn't realize it was that sort of site when I was given the link--though some of the wording in the article is a bit telling), but the fact is Anita was brought on as an "advisor" by EA. Though the details are unclear about any compensation she may or may not receive from them as a result, it may have an effect on her research.

 

[Platy]

Thoughts?

The article is highly biassed (just because some girl is atacked it don't make her a damsell in distress) .. and the destructoid mentions twitter as a source for her working on EA

I follow her on twitter and the only EA game she ever said anything good about is Mirror's Edge

She did said that she gave a lecture about powerful female characters to Dice .... but she also said she gave the same lecture to others companies

 

[akidnamededdy]

I follow her on twitter and the only EA game she ever said anything good about is Mirror's Edge

The theory put forward in the (admittedly slanted and citing anonymous sources) article I linked to is that EA will tap her in the future to drum up Battlefield 4's more progressive and female-friendly qualities.

Which is a bit silly, I suppose. Still, the Sarkeesian-EA connection is something to keep tucked away in the back of your mind going forward.

 

[Lime]

Well, for starters, that would have more credibility if it weren't coming from a disgruntled MRA blog that thinks that meta-damsel-in-distress point is actually clever. But I decided to keep reading. The original source for the claim seems to be this Destructoid blog which is...not well written, to put it mildly, and doesn't provide any sources. Even if it's true, it's not clear how much of her supposed directions to DICE and EA's orders is real and how much of it is the author projecting and taking things out of context. Certainly I would hope for a better source for these claims that EA is hell-bent on fixing sexism in the industry and went about it in the most circuitous, obscure, ineffective way possible than the borderline incoherent stream-of-consciousness rambling of a Destructoid blogger and a screengrab of a 4chan thread. They can't even keep the story straight; was she hired to make Mirror's Edge 2 more female-friendly or Battlefield and Medal of Honor?

If Sarkeesian has indeed been hired as a consultant by EA, she absolutely has a responsibility to disclose that in her finished project, and it will definitely cast a pall if she makes any positive comments about EA games past or future. But I don't necessarily see that as inherently invalidating the entire project, unless you think being hired as a consultant to try to fix a problem automatically makes one unfit to address that problem, which seems to be the logic that blog is making.

I simply cannot understand how you still haven't gotten a tag or anything of appreciation for your reasonable style of posts.

Uh oh my god.

The gender stuff isn't even the worst. Just look at those sets. Those are not LEGOs anymore. LEGOs were tons of bricks, which you could use to build anything you like. Anything you imagined. Which was a great thing.

For me the only real LEGOs are the ones from 1978-1988. The stuff that was released after that is just shit.

That guy should have researched it even more and included sales figures. I would really be interested who came up with that crap and why. Maybe those "sets" sell better, idk.

To me those sets from 1989 onwards look like videogames today. Dumbed down.

I completely agree. The amount of versatility afforded by the old-school Lego is much more entertaining than whatever dumbed down mass-market shit we usually see today.

/getoffmylawn

 

[Platy]

The theory put forward in the (admittedly slanted and citing anonymous sources) article I linked to is that EA will tap her in the future to drum up Battlefield 4's more progressive and female-friendly qualities.

Which is a bit silly, I suppose. Still, the Sarkeesian-EA connection is something to keep tucked away in the back of your mind going forward.

You must noticed that 2 days after she was also hired by the interdisciplinary digital lab of the Umeå University

edit :
Should be noted that this is a double edged sword.... because if they learned ANYTHING from that talk, there WILL BE something to be praised.... in the same way she would praise every place she was in (from Double Fine to Bungie) ... but the EA praise will look like paid work

 

[JustinBB7]

Didn't she say Mirrors Edge was too hard for women and that it should be made easier so women will play too? I think I read that somewhere. If true, and she now works for Dice they can keep Mirrors Edge 2 and never release it. Don't want a dumbed down game.

 

[idlethreats]

Call it what you will (for the record, I didn't realize it was that sort of site when I was given the link--though some of the wording in the article is a bit telling), but the fact is Anita was brought on as an "advisor" by EA. Though the details are unclear about any compensation she may or may not receive from them as a result, it may have an effect on her research.

She was not brought on as an 'advisor' to EA, DICE invited her to give a talk to their studio about gender in games. Bungie did the same last year. She's spoken publicly about this multiple times, it's not something secret that she's hiding from anyone. She's not paid to give these talks, but the studios do compensate her for travel and lodgings, as is standard when professional organizations hire speakers. She's pretty much open to speaking about gender with any studio that's interested in bringing her in.

I simply cannot understand how you still haven't gotten a tag or anything of appreciation for your reasonable style of posts.

fer reals. faceless007 is the unsung hero of gender threads on Gaming side.

 

[Platy]

Didn't she say Mirrors Edge was too hard for women and that it should be made easier so women will play too? I think I read that somewhere. If true, and she now works for Dice they can keep Mirrors Edge 2 and never release it. Don't want a dumbed down game.

[citation needed]

I would love to see the source of this ... because it don't sound like ANYTHING she would say

 

[Mononoke]

fixed

Same thing. Objectification of the human body sells. This goes for both genders. Men and Women love sex and ad agencies play off this when selling their products. Because again, humans love sex.

 

[polyh3dron]

Didn't she say Mirrors Edge was too hard for women and that it should be made easier so women will play too? I think I read that somewhere. If true, and she now works for Dice they can keep Mirrors Edge 2 and never release it. Don't want a dumbed down game.

if so then that is sexist as fuck.

 

[Perkel]

So did she actually play games ?

 

[Platy]

Same thing. Objectification of the human body sells. This goes for both genders. Men and Women love sex and ad agencies play off this when selling their products. Because again, humans love sex.

It is perfectly possible to have sex without objectification or sexism.

Male objectification for sexual reasons don't sell.

Non objectified and sexist sex sell very little.

Sexism sells like hotcakes

So did she actually play games ?

Since when Snes was "next gen"

 

[Mononoke]

It is perfectly possible to have sex without objectification or sexism.

Male objectification for sexual reasons don't sell.

Non objectified and sexist sex sell very little.

Sexism sells like hotcakes



Since when Snes was "next gen"

Do you have proof that male objectification doesn't sell? Ever seen underwear ads, abecrombie, romance novels etc.

I disagree. Or are you suggesting only Males have an inherent problem women don't have, and only they love objectification.

EDIT: Let me clarify. I'm not suggesting that male objectification is equal in female objectification. I agree that when it comes to selling products, women are used a lot more than men (in sexist ways). No doubt. I'm not making this a contest. My point was though, I think both males and females love sex, and sex would sell to both genders equally. I'm not saying it is sold equally. Just that, I think it's more of a human problem - and companies are all to quick to exploit this and use it.

 

[AlimNassor]

Same thing. Objectification of the human body sells. This goes for both genders. Men and Women love sex and ad agencies play off this when selling their products. Because again, humans love sex.

All this feminist stuff has me thinking, why do men not get a movement? MRA aren't even about men rights, they're all conservatives about as whiny as hardcore feminists. You ask a MRA about the medias image of a man and he'll call you a feminist because "men are supposed to be macho". Why do men gotta be big hulking macho guys that ain't show no skin or emotion? Gears of War is a prime offender.

 

[volpone]

It's like I'm watching a live show of the dangers of misinformation here.

[citation needed]

 

[AlimNassor]

It's like I'm watching a live show of the dangers of misinformation here.

[citation needed]

Well, it's true, every movement is still at it's core is sexist. We need a movement for both sexes to be truly equal or the core problem of gender roles will still be unresolved. It's bigger then men or women, it involves both sexes and their unrealistic images placed on them.

 

[Minus_Me]

Really nice to say that Mirror's Edge is too difficult for woman. Way to go there.

 

[Mononoke]

Really nice to say that Mirror's Edge is too difficult for woman. Way to go there.

Anita thinks that it's sexist for Women to take on any qualities she thinks are "masculine". For instance, any kind of women that uses guns, is in action roles (like a warrior, hitman, merc) - is just an example of men writing women to be like men. Another form of objectifying females, by denying their "feminine" traits in favor of "masculine" traits.

Basically, she's saying that women are incapable of things we define as "masculine".

I do agree to an extent, that if a male is writing a female character, there is going to be biases into the character. But I feel that way about anyone writing anybody else, that is not their sex/culture. So I think she's reaching big time, in this regard.

 

[volpone]

Well, it's true, every movement is still at it's core is sexist. We need a movement for both sexes to be truly equal or the core problem of gender roles will still be unresolved. It's bigger then men or women, it involves both sexes and their unrealistic images placed on them.

I was referring to the destructoid blog piece speculating (fabricating) that Anita now works for EA, and then people slowly starting to take it as fact, despite there being no evidence for it.

However in reference to your post before, it's pretty counter-intuitive to say that feminism is destructive towards men. It's a movement about equality, not advancing women ahead of men. Men do not need a movement because society is rather comfortably oriented around us.

 

[Platy]

Really nice to say that Mirror's Edge is too difficult for woman. Way to go there.

And again I say ... that goes against EVERYTHING she ever said.

She never said ANY game is "too dificult to girls" or never said ANYTHING bad about Mirror's Edge

also

All this feminist stuff has me thinking, why do men not get a movement? MRA aren't even about men rights, they're all conservatives about as whiny as hardcore feminists. You ask a MRA about the medias image of a man and he'll call you a feminist because "men are supposed to be macho". Why do men gotta be big hulking macho guys that ain't show no skin or emotion? Gears of War is a prime offender.

They have it .. it is called Feminism, but if you are suggesting this nothing I say can make you change your mind =P

Do you have proof that male objectification doesn't sell? Ever seen underwear ads, abecrombie, romance novels etc.

I disagree. Or are you suggesting only Males have an inherent problem women don't have, and only they love objectification.

EDIT: Let me clarify. I'm not suggesting that male objectification is equal in female objectification. I agree that when it comes to selling products, women are used a lot more than men (in sexist ways). No doubt. I'm not making this a contest. My point was though, I think both males and females love sex, and sex would sell to both genders equally. I'm not saying it is sold equally. Just that, I think it's more of a human problem - and companies are all to quick to exploit this and use it.

I onde read a perfect article about that .... but using "woman sexualized male" on google is fucking hard to find anything, don't matter whatever other word you are using with it =P

I found this one, wich is not exactly good ... but it fits for now :

women's attitudes toward sexually oriented advertising would improve if ads depicted sex in a manner consistent with women's intrinsic values—for example if the sexual behavior appeared to reflect devotion and commitment.

In other words, change a sexualized advertising to a .... loveable advertising =P

But yes, I know that men will buy even cigars if they say the cigar will turn you into Hugh Hefner