Support NeoGAF

[PaulExcellent]

I am not an expert. However, as a viewer, I expect a presentation to be more lively than an article: there should be a visible speaker, few words, images, videos, etc. Otherwise, I expect a script of the video to be provided so that I can read it at my own pace, I don't care about the voice of the narrator in this particular case.

I see your point, and I agree with your opinion.
She did show some pictures and footage, but there could have been more scenes and pictures that could have expanded on her points. That is true.

 

[IHaveCandy]

I don't buy that half of the gaming market is female. At least not when we are talking about multi-million dollar games. People say that women buy less of those games because they don't even attempt to appeal to women, but I'm having a hard time buying that half the people that bought Mirror's Edge or Gravity Rush were women. It's not that women don't play games. I just don't buy the half/half argument. I could understand if we're talking mainly handheld/mobile stuff since that is more common. But as it is now, we are in a culture that raises girls to typically be less interested in games, and that pressure causes less women to be interested in bigger style games.

 

[royalan]

and the feminist approach is trying to fight an inivisible being which doesn't exist. Just as stupid. (oh, and I was laughing at the ethics part, feminism, videogames and ethics? good one friend, keep fighting that imaginary monster)

...did you really just imply that gender inequality in video games doesn't exist?

I didn't agree with your previous posts, but I was honestly making the attempt to follow along with your reasoning until right about here.

 

[Satch]

I don't buy that half of the gaming market is female. At least not when we are talking about multi-million dollar games. People say that women buy less of those games because they don't even attempt to appeal to women, but I'm having a hard time buying that half the people that bought Mirror's Edge or Gravity Rush were women. It's not that women don't play games. I just don't buy the half/half argument. I could understand if we're talking mainly handheld/mobile stuff since that is more common. But as it is now, we are in a culture that raises girls to typically be less interested in games, and that pressure causes less women to be interested in bigger style games.

what the

women dont have to make up half of the buying power of every single game on the market to be half of the buying power of the industry

do you think that half of the people that bought mary kate and ashley's winner's circle (a very fun horse game) were men

 

[Artemisia]

maybe you want to shed all history thats attached to these games (and all games which borrow from the past), but I dont, just like I dont suddenly want chell to be a man if there's another portal game, nor do I want to choose to be man in the next one, nor do I care.

Some change wouldn't be shedding all the history of the series, and change is one of the main things people want out of two series you mentioned: Mario and Zelda.

 

[Inanna]

So she's debating Anita then, not feminist theory?

I said point to where she is debunking feminist theory. You said she needs a book on it. What are you talking about?

Well, at one point she did say there is nothing wrong with being an adorable ditzy damsel in distress. A feminist or a person who knows what feminist theory is wouldn't say that!

 

[zkylon]

that's great for right now. But that's not what we're talking about, we're talking about the conception of the legend of zelda and mario games, when gaming was something that was child oriented, and particularly male centric. These games have a story structure thats linked to their initial game concepts, and while gaming audiences have changed, these games are still heavily tied to their inception. That said, zelda is no longer just the princess who gets caught in act one. In oot she becomes shiek, in ww she's a pirate leader, and peach is found in a myriad of games beside mario now.

maybe you want to shed all history thats attached to these games (and all games which borrow from the past), but I dont, just like I dont suddenly want chell to be a man if there's another portal game, nor do I want to choose to be man in the next one, nor do I care.

like I said earlier, kite tales is right about zelda, and even some parts about peach, and I've already said anita's video is shit, what are you going on about?

my problem has nothing to do with those cases in particular, as you'd known if you had bothered to read my post.

you're comparing selling videogames to tampons, man, how unwilling to even approach the issue can you get?

and when you get the numbers that say "you're wrong, the amount of male and female gamers is just about the same" you decide oh wait it's not about the right now!

it is about the right now, the issue of gender in games is being brought up right now, because of the problems it relates to today. you're ignoring it out of convenience because you really have zero to add to any discussion.

and the feminist approach is trying to fight an inivisible being which doesn't exist. Just as stupid. (oh, and I was laughing at the ethics part, feminism, videogames and ethics? good one friend, keep fighting that imaginary monster)

what the fuck are you talking about dude?

now gender inequality isn't an ethics issue?

I don't buy that half of the gaming market is female. At least not when we are talking about multi-million dollar games. People say that women buy less of those games because they don't even attempt to appeal to women, but I'm having a hard time buying that half the people that bought Mirror's Edge or Gravity Rush were women. It's not that women don't play games. I just don't buy the half/half argument. I could understand if we're talking mainly handheld/mobile stuff since that is more common. But as it is now, we are in a culture that raises girls to typically be less interested in games, and that pressure causes less women to be interested in bigger style games.

latest RPS article says 47% of gamers are women (data taken from ESA), with 20% of all hardcore gamers being women. here's the link: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/04/06/misogyny-sexism-and-why-rps-isnt-shutting-up/

that's a shitload of women.

that's a fact, we just can't hide behind the whole gaming's a "male centric" thing anymore, girls' caught up that this shit's cool.

...did you really just imply that gender inequality in video games doesn't exist?

I didn't agree with your previous posts, but I was honestly making the attempt to follow along with your reasoning until right about here.

it's all in your mind bro, it's what dem cultist zionists want you to believe!

let's just not talk about it and maybe they'll get tired and die

 

[frequency]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/mcelroy/mcelroy11.html

Want to warn you, though, that this is not only a newer form of feminism (I had to look long and hard through Google to finally find that this sort of camp within feminism exists, though I knew it had to somewhere), but there seems to be a feud brewing between them and radical feminists.

However, I think this is fine. Everyone has their own idea of what inequality actually is, and how we should achieve equality (and what the definition of equality is, as well). I don't know how well you'll agree with sentiments such as what McElroy brings up, but you will understand what I'm getting at more when you read through that. I think I've been identifying with that form of feminism, and to think that I didn't know there was a term for it.

So after reading that link, I find the distinction between feminist factions silly. I don't adhere to any set of rules to determine how I should feel about inequality.

I think whether you're a traditional feminist or an ifeminist or whatever else is irelevant to this discussion of inequality in the video games industry.

You can argue that portraying women that want to dress in as little clothing as possible or women who choose to be weak and put themselves in capturable situations is a realistic portrayal of choice.
But I would say that is a disingenuous argument. There is no reason to create women that make these choices in such vast numbers. Especially when you consider the male counterparts and their portrayals.

It is basically an argument that realism only applies to women. Men are allowed to have fantastical abilities and despite making terrible choices, their superhuman strength/intelligence/whatever gets them out of trouble. Meanwhile the women's abilities, no matter how amazing the author claims they are, leave them in vulnerable states - left to await their male saviours. Like Zelda for the majority of that series.

Your views do apply to some real life situations. For example, you brought up Jessica Nigri in the last thread. She should be able to dress as she pleases and should not be discriminated against if there are men in costumes just as sexy/scanty.
And if I understand it right, in some ways, I agree with some principles of this faction. I used to post in GirlGAF but I had to step out permanently when I was told people like me do not deserve any respect because we are fine with being housewives.

But I do not find it applicable here. In fictional worlds where creators use very different rule sets in their definitions of "woman" and "man".


Note that my argument is not so much to change franchises that exist if it doesn't fit. Perhaps Mario should remain as it is and Zelda as it is. My fight is for future titles, whether they be in existing franchises or new IPs, to have better quality and quantity of female representatives. Spend more time working on her character/in-game portrayal as a human being and less time determining how big her breasts should be, whether she's wearing too much clothing to be titillating enough, and how low the camera should be whenever it pans behind her.
It is my belief that these are harmful portrayals that help to perpetuate the myth that it is okay to treat women as objects or simply as the lesser gender. And that leads us to the industry as it is today. Rampant with sexism and with a huge barrier to overcome for any woman interested in entering. She must be prepared to sacrifice her dignity.

Edit: Also note that I believe it is simply not true that the vast majority of feminists want superiority rather than equality. As many "individual feminists" claim. I think the disconnect is that many of these "individual feminists" believe we are closer to equality than we actually are. And so they take that we ask for such huge improvements to mean we want significantly more than equality. It's a disagreement on the current status of women and equality.

it's not the audience, it's the market.

It's like saying we should be marketing tampons to men... why? If the audience is mostly male, the developers are mostly male, then of course games are going to be more male-centric in design.

Well... thanks for saying video games just aren't for me. That video games are biologically for men and so I should never be considered.

 

[APF]

Wait, did someone just claim Nintendo focus-tested the original Mario and Zelda games?

 

[ZealousD]

So after reading that link, I find the distinction between feminist factions silly. I don't adhere to any set of rules to determine how I should feel about inequality.

I think whether you're a traditional feminist or an ifeminist or whatever else is irelevant to this discussion of inequality in the video games industry.

I think it's pretty important when we're talking about specifics examples of what tropes/characters are problematic, though.

Different branches of feminism might have very different opinions about a character like Bayonetta, for example.

 

[plagiarize]

sigh. so many guys arguing for the status quo. arguing against the examples given in support of clear trends doesn't stop the trends being clear. it's pretty simple.

oh but it's all okay because one girl agrees! because no black people were pro segregation. nope. not one.

blah.

 

[APF]

I think it's pretty important when we're talking about specifics examples of what tropes/characters are problematic, though.

Different branches of feminism might have very different opinions about a character like Bayonetta, for example.

Which only matters if you're trying to make some sort of appeal to authority, which no one is doing.


plagiarize: there are black / hispanic / gay / female / etc Republicans too--guess there's no problem with that party then.

 

[Jibbajabbawockky]

I liked this video more than Anita's but it acts as a good companion piece really.

I especially like how she makes the point of trying to put things in a positive light and encourage positive discussion. With Anita's videos they come across as much more doom and gloom and wrought with negativity, just trying to make the narrative fit her own thesis.

 

[CengizMan]

This is a perfect response video. I really like it. And absolutely love the fact that she mentioned Pocky & Rocky.

A bit off-topic by the way, but I believe I just realized that the name of Rocky, the tanooki or raccoon, is based on the Beatles song Rocky Raccoon.

But, like I said, this is a great response video. She found the words I had been searching. Big props.

 

[Riposte]

sigh. so many guys arguing for the status quo. arguing against the examples given in support of clear trends doesn't stop the trends being clear. it's pretty simple.

oh but it's all okay because one girl agrees! because no black people were pro segregation. nope. not one.

blah.

Trying to compare people who enjoy the characterization of specified "damsels" to those who had a pro-segregation stance is stunningly ridiculous.

 

[IHaveCandy]

what the

women dont have to make up half of the buying power of every single game on the market to be half of the buying power of the industry

do you think that half of the people that bought mary kate and ashley's winner's circle (a very fun horse game) were men

I'm saying if you are making a game that typically sells a lot and has a high budget, typically half your audience isn't female. Activision doesn't care how many women buy "Mary Kate and Ashley's Winner Circle" as you pointed out when they make Call of Duty. I find it a bit pointless to being those games up when they are irrelevant here. It's like saying half of women watch movies, so movies like The Expendabled or any other male power fantasy movie should act as if half of THEIR market is women when it isn't.

 

[IHaveCandy]

latest RPS article says 47% of gamers are women (data taken from ESA), with 20% of all hardcore gamers being women. here's the link: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/04/06/misogyny-sexism-and-why-rps-isnt-shutting-up/

that's a shitload of women.

that's a fact, we just can't hide behind the whole gaming's a "male centric" thing anymore, girls' caught up that this shit's cool.

Well that sort of makes my point. It says 20% of hardcore gamers are female. My entire point was that game companies making "hardcore games" shouldn't expect half of their market to be female just because there are a lot of women that play video games that are entirely different.

 

[Infinite]

Is this the same woman that said female gamers are ok with the supposed over sexualized look of female characters in games because they dress that way all the time themselves at conventions where they cosplay said characters?

 

[voodoopanda]

I think an interesting part of Anita's video that seems sometimes overlooked is when she states that these characters aren't defined by being "damsels in distress" but that it's something that happens to the characters. The character could be anything, a mighty warrior or princess or what have you, but what happens to the character is they get captured and have to be saved. And it continually happens over and over to them. If you could play as Princess Peach in Super Mario Bros, you wouldn't be spending your time managing a kingdom, you'd walk around for a few moments, get grabbed by Bowser, then spend however long it takes someone to beat SMB walking around in that one room at the end. It isn't a criticism of the character herself, but a criticism of a thing that keeps happening to these female characters over and over.

Although thinking about it, a game in the style of ActRaiser or Dark Cloud or Little King's Story, where you play as Princess Peach and manage the Mushroom Kingdom would be pretty rad.

 

[APF]

Although thinking about it, a game in the style of ActRaiser or Dark Cloud or Little King's Story, where you play as Princess Peach and manage the Mushroom Kingdom would be pretty rad.

Sorry, women don't play these games so the only thing Nintendo can do is make another NSMB where Peach is captured by Bowser again.

 

[kvothe]

Can we please, for the love of god, stop with this bullshit about the budget? Anita received way more than she asked for, how is that her fault?

 

[Akainu]

I think an interesting part of Anita's video that seems sometimes overlooked is when she states that these characters aren't defined by being "damsels in distress" but that it's something that happens to the characters. The character could be anything, a mighty warrior or princess or what have you, but what happens to the character is they get captured and have to be saved. And it continually happens over and over to them. If you could play as Princess Peach in Super Mario Bros, you wouldn't be spending your time managing a kingdom, you'd walk around for a few moments, get grabbed by Bowser, then spend however long it takes someone to beat SMB walking around in that one room at the end. It isn't a criticism of the character herself, but a criticism of a thing that keeps happening to these female characters over and over.

Although thinking about it, a game in the style of ActRaiser or Dark Cloud or Little King's Story, where you play as Princess Peach and manage the Mushroom Kingdom would be pretty rad.

The mushroom kingdom seems to be completely free of any conflict save for Bowser attacks.

 

[Riposte]

Sorry, women don't play these games so the only thing Nintendo can do is make another NSMB where Peach is captured by Bowser again.

Nintendo knows women play games, but I think their data tells them to make more Animal Crossing not an "ActRaiser meets Mushroom Kingdom" combo (I'd be down though).

 

[kvothe]

A lot of this video seems dedicated to defending the characters as if they really exist and aren't just creations. That's the problem. It would be totally fine for a person like Peach to exist in the real world, even if she's ditzy and naive and helpless. But Peach is not a person, she is a creation, a media product meant to be sold to the mass market. With that understanding, people should be allowed to ask, "Why does she have to be ditzy? Why does she constantly need to be rescued?" Because an author put her in this position, not the uncontrollable and unexpected elements of real life.
And that last bit of asking "Do you think Robin Williams would have named his daughter Zelda if she wasn't a strong character?" has absolutely no logic in it. None of us know Robin Williams on a personal level, so how the hell are we supposed to know if he cares about equality for women.

 

[kvothe]

Nintendo knows women play games, but I think their data tells them to make more Animal Crossing not an "ActRaiser meets Mushroom Kingdom" combo (I'd be down though).

I think he was being sarcastic. All these people saying, "Well women aren't a big market share, why should we appeal to them?" are ignoring the fact that if you make a game non-sexist, it doesn't immediately stop being appealing to male gamers. We could have a NSMB game where Peach isn't kidnapped and instead has a unique storyline where women aren't made into damsels in distress and male gamers could still buy it/want it.

 

[airmangataosenai]

sigh. so many guys arguing for the status quo. arguing against the examples given in support of clear trends doesn't stop the trends being clear. it's pretty simple.

oh but it's all okay because one girl agrees! because no black people were pro segregation. nope. not one.

blah.

In the case of Zelda at least, I'd say that Kite Tales got it exactly right. There really isn't anything wrong with the character and how she's portrayed in the modern games. She's important in the context of the world she's in and an active participant in the action. True she needs Links help at some point in most games, but the opposite is also true. Very often she plays in active role in the final boss battle too.

Sarkeesian's analysis comes from a place of starting with a conclusion and selectively deciding which evidence matters and what doesn't based solely on whether or not it supports her own preconceived notions, which is inherently flawed.

 

[Stet]

In the case of Zelda at least, I'd say that Kite Tales got it exactly right. There really isn't anything wrong with the character and how she's portrayed in the modern games. She's important in the context of the world she's in and an active participant in the action. True she needs Links help at some point in most games, but the opposite is also true. Very often she plays in active role in the final boss battle too.

Sarkeesian's analysis comes from a place of starting with a conclusion and selectively deciding which evidence matters and what doesn't based solely on whether or not it supports her own preconceived notions, which is inherently flawed.

Describe Zelda's personality without using the words "wise" or "princess".

 

[airmangataosenai]

Describe Zelda's personality without using the words "wise" or "princess".

Describe Link's.

The individual games play around with her personality anyway so it isn't a consistent thing. If you mean specifically Zelda as a princess (OMG I used the word!), then she acts somewhat reserved and stoic because that's what the expectations would be for a character in her position. When in non-princess (I can't help myself!) mode she shows more emotion for this reason, she's not dealing with those expectations.

 

[Stet]

Describe Link's.

So what you're saying is that Zelda is as fully fleshed out as a character that never speaks, even though she speaks throughout the series.

 

[Riposte]

So what you're saying is that Zelda is as fully fleshed out as a character that never speaks, even though she speaks throughout the series.

How about Ganon's? Let's say without the words power-hungry/greedy and warlord/dark lord. This isn't really a point since Zelda as a series employs light characterization and straightforward storytelling.

 

[Stet]

How about Ganon's? Let's say without the words power-hungry/greedy and warlord/dark lord. This isn't really a point since Zelda as a series employs light characterization and straightforward storytelling.

Ganon is a ferocious leader who doesn't care about the fate of the world as long as he's in control of it. He was the only male member of the Gerudo tribe... etc.

 

[Riposte]

Ganon is a ferocious leader who doesn't care about the fate of the world as long as he's in control of it. He was the only male member of the Gerudo tribe... etc.

"Ferocious leader" = warlord/darklord
"doesn't care about the world as long as he is in control of it" = greedy/power-hungry.
"Only male member of the Gerudo tribe" = describing his role, a la "princess".

Come on dude.

 

[airmangataosenai]

Ganon is a ferocious leader who doesn't care about the fate of the world as long as he's in control of it. He was the only male member of the Gerudo tribe... etc.

"Zelda is the only child of the ruling family of Hyrule. She cares a great deal about the safety of her kingdom and has worked through the ages to keep them safe from harm."

Does that work?

 

[Stet]

His role is as the villain of the series. The only male member of the Gerudo tribe who rose to lead it because of his skill in magic and combat is a backstory. Tell me one detail about Zelda as a princess. One detail. How did she rule? Who were her parents? How long have they been in power?


The hilarious part of this is that in looking up whether or not any of this has been mentioned in the series, I noticed that even in the wikipedia articles on the two characters, Ganon actually has a "Personality" heading while Zelda has none.

 

[airmangataosenai]

His role is as the villain of the series. The only male member of the Gerudo tribe who rose to lead it because of his skill in magic and combat is a backstory. Tell me one detail about Zelda as a princess. One detail. How did she rule? Who were her parents? How long have they been in power?

Listen to yourself, everything you're saying here can be equally applied to Ganondorf. We know just about as much about the King as we do about Koume/Kotake. Arguably, maybe a bit more.

 

[APF]

I think he was being sarcastic. All these people saying, "Well women aren't a big market share, why should we appeal to them?" are ignoring the fact that if you make a game non-sexist, it doesn't immediately stop being appealing to male gamers. We could have a NSMB game where Peach isn't kidnapped and instead has a unique storyline where women aren't made into damsels in distress and male gamers could still buy it/want it.

Exactly. We can even have games that "cater to male gamers" without being sexist. It's both absurd and insulting to men to say we need sexism (or cliches, etc) in order to be interested in something.

 

[Riposte]

His role is as the villain of the series. The only male member of the Gerudo tribe who rose to lead it because of his skill in magic and combat is a backstory. Tell me one detail about Zelda as a princess. One detail. How did she rule? Who were her parents? How long have they been in power?

Her parents are not important outside The Wind Waker, just like Ganon's Gerudo origins hardly matter outside Ocarina of Time. We hardly know the details of her rule, because she is rarely in a position to rule during the games (though I suggest you read what hachi has to say on Twilight Princess's Zelda for details on how she ruled). I can tell you, for example, she was trained by Impa in OoT to become Sheik. That's not really a "personality" thing though and you are completely defeating the purpose of your original point.

The larger point here is that this hardly matters. Zelda has light characterization because she is in a series which uses light characterization. You are criticizer her out of context and are now bending your own argument to make it fit. I'm not overlooking how embarrassing your attempt to describe Ganon outside the box you made for Zelda was. I repeat: "come on dude".

 

[campfireweekend]

So what you're saying is that Zelda is as fully fleshed out as a character that never speaks, even though she speaks throughout the series.

Do you play Zelda? Her personality is like completely different in each game. Tetra isn't the same as TP Zelda, and neither are like skyward sword's Zelda.

 

[Stet]

Her parents are not important outside The Wind Waker, just like Ganon's Gerudo origins hardly matter outside Ocarina of Time. We hardly know the details of her rule, because she is rarely in a position to rule during the games (though I suggest you read what hachi has to say on Twilight Princess's Zelda for details on how she ruled). I can tell you, for example, she was trained by Impa in OoT to become Sheik. That's not really a "personality" thing though and you are completely defeating the purpose of your original point.

The larger point here is that this hardly matters. Zelda has light characterization because she is in a series which uses light characterization. You are criticizer her out of context and are now bending your own argument to make it fit. I'm not overlooking how embarrassing your attempt to describe Ganon outside the box you made for Zelda was. I repeat: "come on dude".

My attempt to describe Ganon was put into a box of your own creation. I could've said he was bad at paying back money on time and you would've said "NOPE, THAT'S JUST HIM BEING AN EVIL LORD."

Do you play Zelda? Her personality is like completely different in each game. Tetra isn't the same as TP Zelda, and neither are like skyward sword's Zelda.

And yet...no takers...

 

[RagnarokX]

Listen to yourself, everything you're saying here can be equally applied to Ganondorf. We know just about as much about the King as we do about Koume/Kotake. Arguably, maybe a bit more.

Well, we know a little more about the King from OoT since he had a significant role in Wind Waker. The real question there is what did Ganon do to him during OoT? Was he in a cell somewhere? Why did nobody want to rescue him? He wasn't even important enough to show in OoT; they just show Ganon bowing to him but you can't see him.

The King in ALttP just outright gets murdered by Ganon. Having a penis isn't always an effective defense.

 

[campfireweekend]

My attempt to describe Ganon was put into a box of your own creation. I could've said he was bad at paying back money on time and you would've said "NOPE, THAT'S JUST HIM BEING AN EVIL LORD."





And yet...no takers...

Tetra in comparison to her other incarnations is a lot smarmier and cockier (which make sense as she's a captain of a pirate ship in that game)While she usually treats Link graciously, she uses him more as a tool in the beginning of Windwaker and thus has a more domineering personality than obviously link, but also more so than any other character besides Ganon. She actually doesn't seem very wise or princess like throughout that game either

 

[Deleted member 17706]

I don't think I really understand the point of calling out Peach and Zelda having to be rescued as bad examples of women's treatment in video games. What would you have Nintendo do? Are you saying that scenarios in which women must be rescued are flat out unacceptable?

 

[Kinyou]

Or would she be a Fighting Fuck Toy?

I swear, it's like she has a trope name for every situation and they're all bad. The only feasible solution would be to no longer have any female characters in video games but then she'd of course ask why there are no female characters.

That's probably my biggest issue with the series. It seems like no matter what you do there's no avoiding of at least one trope.

 

[campfireweekend]

That's probably my biggest issue with the series. It seems like no matter what you do there's no avoiding of at least one trope.

I think that's true of all narratives and characters at this point. You're either complying with existing tropes, or you're subverting them

 

[gabbo]

I think that's true of all narratives and characters at this point. You're either complying with existing tropes, or you're subverting them

While true, not all tropes are based around ingrained social inequalities, and whose continued use normalize those inequalities like this particular one.

 

[zkylon]

Well that sort of makes my point. It says 20% of hardcore gamers are female. My entire point was that game companies making "hardcore games" shouldn't expect half of their market to be female just because there are a lot of women that play video games that are entirely different.

games are easier and more accesible than ever, so it's not like any company is making "hardcore" games anymore. and then 20% is not something to scoff at, it's a lot bro.

just think about it, the industry tries its hardest to alienate one fifth of its most devoted fans. it's insane.

this isn't a chicken and the egg scenario, it's not like women are incapable of playing shooters, it's that in most games you can almost literally taste the testosterone being thrown in your face.

 

[darkpower]

So after reading that link, I find the distinction between feminist factions silly. I don't adhere to any set of rules to determine how I should feel about inequality.

I think whether you're a traditional feminist or an ifeminist or whatever else is irelevant to this discussion of inequality in the video games industry.

Well, the similarities between ifem and Libfem is striking, so I got those confused. Thing is, the classes of fems do a few good things:

1. You noticed how a few people rushed to make sure that they didn't come into play. Way harder to bring up the "concern troll" label once you define what type of fem you are in contrast to the person in the spotlight.
2. You then have an easier time defining what your definitions of gender equality, oppression, goals, and actions to achieve those goals are in comparison to spotlighted fem. In this case, Anita might have the same idea, but what she sees as gender inequality in the cases she presented I might see differently because of how we both interpret a particular scene. The Marian one, for example, can be interpreted differently. You see it as a gender role scene, but I interpreted it differently. Nothing wrong with this, as I made clear, because that's the nature of the beast when you get issues like this come out. You SHOULD have an open mind and difference of opinions, and shouldn't just label people. The "camps" have been around for years and feminists use them freely, so they are not detrimental by themselves (your opinions on what they believe, though, might change that), so those shouldn't count in that equation. But yeah, this is how we see where everyone stands. Some people just don't agree on what should be called out and what is just "crying wolf", but we all want gender equality in some form or fashion.

You can argue that portraying women that want to dress in as little clothing as possible or women who choose to be weak and put themselves in capturable situations is a realistic portrayal of choice.
But I would say that is a disingenuous argument. There is no reason to create women that make these choices in such vast numbers. Especially when you consider the male counterparts and their portrayals.

I do agree that we can OD, and in some part have ODed, on using certain tropes so much that they become cliche (the right term for this trope the way Anita is bringing it up as). However, I just think we should be careful to not OD the other way and just make things for the sake of having them.

For instance, we've been going on about wanting more female playables. That's cool, and I would be all for it. But I want it to be done in such a way that makes devs want to do more of them because they are in games that don't suck, and they aren't just put in there to please a demographic or to get some cheap sales figures for a game that people would otherwise pass up. I'm not just going to buy a game just because there's a female protagonist in there, but if the game is ALSO done well (as in, I'm going to have fun PLAYING the game as much as I like playing as the "chick"), then that'll change the scene because it'll encourage the production of more games like that.

More to YOUR point, though, we should make both genders equal to each other and not define things based on gender roles but rather roles that a certain character to be in. I think game designers should be free to make characters that would make their game more interesting, and who we can relate to. This is why I try to examine all the circumstances surrounding a kidnapping before I go calling it demoralizing to women. It's because there are some circumstances (like the numbers game that I eluded to in the DD scenario) that I wouldn't expect anyone to have a chance against.

It is basically an argument that realism only applies to women. Men are allowed to have fantastical abilities and despite making terrible choices, their superhuman strength/intelligence/whatever gets them out of trouble. Meanwhile the women's abilities, no matter how amazing the author claims they are, leave them in vulnerable states - left to await their male saviours. Like Zelda for the majority of that series.

The Zelda stuff does bother me...not you bringing it up, but Zelda as an example at all. Before anyone freaks out over that, this is because...has anyone ever known anything about what the timeline for Zelda actually is? More to the point, Zelda 2's manual brought up that every princess was named Zelda, so in theory, you could be saving a different Zelda every single game (and more to THAT point, you could not even be in the same timeline from one game to the next). I don't know. Zelda's case is a weird one for that.

However, on the males always being "macho" part, I would agree with you there, and thank God they've gotten more believable, as well. Nathan Drake, for example, I would call one because he seemed to be one that knew he was in something deep. The characters in Heavy Rain (ALL of them) were very well done and provided for some really deep storyline and dialogue that made you immersed in the story.

Your views do apply to some real life situations. For example, you brought up Jessica Nigri in the last thread. She should be able to dress as she pleases and should not be discriminated against if there are men in costumes just as sexy/scanty.
And if I understand it right, in some ways, I agree with some principles of this faction. I used to post in GirlGAF but I had to step out permanently when I was told people like me do not deserve any respect because we are fine with being housewives.

First off, I'm sorry that had to happen. In all fairness, some women are just fine being one. Some women aren't. I don't think you should be forced into a certain role, however.

I have a deep seeded hatred for that whole Jessica incident. Things got condoned when they shouldn't have, and I even got on Daily Kos about it (rarely do I post a gaming diary entry there).

But I do not find it applicable here. In fictional worlds where creators use very different rule sets in their definitions of "woman" and "man".

This is...where I can say I agree and disagree. I love immersion. If a story is good and well done, and if what happens to any one character somehow breaks that immersion, or it breaks a sort of gender blindness that you could have when playing a game, then you've done something wrong with it. If, however, I could see a person reasonably getting in over their head and getting what's coming to them as a result, and it's within their character and within the bounds of reason for something in the universe to actually happen in terms of action and reaction, then they've done their job, and I'm immersed. Even if someone is captured (and more to the point, if it's a female), if it's within the bounds of reason in that environment, character, story, circumstance, and sanity, then chances are that'll just increase the immersion because you care about those characters.

Fiction is weird because in one way, you want it to, in a sense, mirror reality because you get more relation, but you also want to break from reality from time to time, which makes it a hard balance to achieve. The goal is to give characters their own strengths and weaknesses in order to give them challenges to overcome, fears to conquer and/or to hamper them, etc. Doing that makes for better immersion. You don't want for gender roles to play a part, but you can't let yourself become dictated by the fear that something you do to make a woman weak in a certain area (like, say, her handling a gun, something that would freak many out and that gender wouldn't dictate if you have that fear) would make someone call you a sexist. They should be allowed to make compelling characters.

Of course, some might be saying I'm talking out of my ass there, but this is my opinion about how I think game characters should be made. I want compelling characters that I can relate to and that I can get behind, care about, and make me more immersed into the story because that will be part of what will want me to continue to play the game.

Note that my argument is not so much to change franchises that exist if it doesn't fit. Perhaps Mario should remain as it is and Zelda as it is.

1. Need to bring this up, but when I brought up this on MMO Champion, someone responded that they were a Peach/Bowser shipper growing up. I...don't have anything else to say about that, really. Whatever floats their boat!
2. Like I said, Zelda is a weird case because of how dizzy the canon's timeline can make us. That and I would LOVE a Zelda game where she's the main character. Do it well, and make her like she was in the comic I discussed, and holy fuck, that'll move copies.
3. I've always had a thought about a story in which Mario is about to fight Bowser to save Peach, but then Peach turns evil in such a way that she's found a way to "pussy whip" Bowser to kneel to her, and then capture Mario, challenging him to escape and face her (because she's tired of being abducted, so she decided to show him how it feels to be the abducted). I wouldn't mind that at all. Thinking of writing something like that, actually.

My fight is for future titles, whether they be in existing franchises or new IPs, to have better quality and quantity of female representatives. Spend more time working on her character/in-game portrayal as a human being and less time determining how big her breasts should be, whether she's wearing too much clothing to be titillating enough, and how low the camera should be whenever it pans behind her.

Well, new IPs are always a plus. As long as it's compelling, its a game I want to play, the characters are not bland and boring, and it's done well, then I'd be all for it. But I'd also be all for characters like, say, Bayonetta because in that game's case, her demeanor fit well with the story arc, setting, and environment they wanted. Again, this is fine as long as it's not cheesy and they didn't just do it because of a few laughs or "because they could". I guess I'm more of a liberal mind like that.

It is my belief that these are harmful portrayals that help to perpetuate the myth that it is okay to treat women as objects or simply as the lesser gender. And that leads us to the industry as it is today. Rampant with sexism and with a huge barrier to overcome for any woman interested in entering. She must be prepared to sacrifice her dignity.

Yeah, I think the real world is where we should actually start. How we treat female gamers is a good start. In Anita's case, I just think she's educated far beyond her intelligence, but if you notice, I'm arguing against her not because she's a woman, but by the merits of her argument. This is how gamers SHOULD debate topics. The other thread became a troll breeding ground, and that's usually how things end up anymore. That culture needs to change for us to debate ANY sensitive topic seriously. Can't do that if we have several people making the "u mad bro" types of posts or dismissing things as someone "concern trolling".

Edit: Also note that I believe it is simply not true that the vast majority of feminists want superiority rather than equality. As many "individual feminists" claim. I think the disconnect is that many of these "individual feminists" believe we are closer to equality than we actually are. And so they take that we ask for such huge improvements to mean we want significantly more than equality. It's a disagreement on the current status of women and equality.

Actually, I don't think we should ignore the specific camps because I think it's important to understand the mindset of how people view gender equality and what they believe would be such. Some are proud to call themselves radicals, some are proud to be liberals (like myself).

And again, it's VERY good to have disagreements on how we should define and tackle such issues. Makes us more aware about how others perceive things. I don't necessarily agree with you (and I'm sure you probably don't agree with a good bit of what I've said), but I think those that are tossing around this "concern troll" stuff so carelessly are doing an injustice to those that want to have that civil debate and want to hear what other kinds of feminists have to say about topics such as this, and it just reeks of a bullying tactic.

It's good that the topic is brought up, but I don't like HOW Anita brought it up because I believe (again, this is my opinion here) that she didn't provide a fair representation of the topic based upon what my knowledge of the games she brought up are in comparison to what she said about them. I think a better job could've been done to represent the topic (and personally, I think she should've saved this topic for later on in the series and brought up who she feels are positive female characters in games as an intro).

Oh, and to the others in this thread and who posted in the other one, THIS is how you properly debate about topics in games. Let it be known that you debate things like THIS, you'll be taken a LOT more seriously than if you go for silly labels that are used too freely, and you act like you're twelve or whining because you can't handle an opinion that's different than your own. GG, Freq!