Support NeoGAF

[Imru’ al-Qays]

Because it's lazy and thoughtless. Especially with the male elf option. The damsel in distress is used so often because of course men hate it when their women are taken. They must go after them. And this time we add the threat of rape. Why? Hmm how do you show the oppression of the elves in the city? Well... Rape the women. That'll show their oppression. The elf women get raped and the elf men's women get raped. Everyone is oppressed! There are many ways they could have shown how bad the city elves as a whole being oppressed, but they specifically chose one that targeted the women.

Why is it lazy and thoughtless? Your argument basically boils down to "I don't like it because it's a trope." Guess what: everything is a trope. Taking issue with tropes just because they're tropes (and therefore "overused") is ludicrous.

It's not simply about if the act is used, it's about why it's used. What its purpose is. One quick tip would be if using it isn't even about the act itself, but just being used simply as a means to elaborate on something else in the story (example: using it to show how evil someone, or a group is), then you might want to think twice.

You realize that literally everything in a narrative is being used to "elaborate on the story," right? There is no such thing as an event depicted in a work of literature that "is just about the act itself," whatever the hell that means.

Why is it relevant? Men do sometimes play as the female option.

Sure, and women sometimes play as men too. But Sarkeesian's thesis is that this trope exists as a way to titillate male gamers, by putting them in the position of the heroic macho rescuer of the helpless women. Except in this case you can play as a woman and save your own self. She doesn't mention this, however, presumably because it's an indication that her thesis might be oversimplified and she's not intellectually rigorous enough to anticipate and defend against potential criticisms.

They are still both examples. Just because you think one is worse than another doesn't make it not an example. It doesn't invalidate everything in the video, and it doesn't diminish either as an example.

They're not both examples. These are totally different depictions. None of the reasons that Sarkeesian gives for why the women as background decoration trope is supposedly objectionable applies to the Dragon Age example.

 

[RageBot]

What is going on in that first pic?
Edit: Not sure why the quote came up as it did, but the above line is mine obviously.

The woman who is about to get married (or something) used the hashtag "#iftheygunnedmedown".
As a respone, a "SJW" doxxed her (since this is a hashtag that "belongs to black people" and this is "cultural appropriation"). including name, residence, and workplace.

I wrote that post because:

Lisker said that "SJWs" are:

"Basically it's a group of people who are so very easily offended by pretty much anything and everyone that it reaches a point where no matter what you do or say will offend some tender soul out there. Hell, even calling someone "her" or "him" on tumbler can get you threatened, herassed and doxxed by the SJW out there because you did not respect their fantasy/otherkin or whatever they like to call themselves."

And lorebringer responded by saying:

"This is exaggerated nonsense and not relevant at all to this thread. Do you know what "doxxed" means? Because it doesn't happen to people who "use the wrong pronoun" "
(followed by calling him a baby indirectly)..

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

You're welcome.

(Seriously, it really was. It's not a matter of "making rapists complete monsters" vs "making rapists suddenly sympathetic".)

It's about making rapists complete monsters or depicting them as somewhat more sympathetic than complete monsters. There is a characterization spectrum that runs from nonredeemable to sympathetic and you seem to be advocating that it would be better to move the depiction of rapists further towards the sympathetic side of the spectrum.

Avatar cheap shots are allowed now? Okay. But in any case, while I don't want to get in a book vs show argument here, even despite the show's shortcomings, its handling of sexual assault is far more mature and nuanced than the cheap window dressing you see in the games shown in the video. For one thing, the women involved are actually characterized, instead of being, y'know, background decoration. Anita never said sexual abuse should never be depicted at all, she took issue with the manner in which it was.

I've been talking about one game in particular where the women are characterized (one of them is the player character) but that Sarkeesian still criticizes as being an example of her trope.

 

[ChawlieTheFair]

But she does help the cause. Prominent devs (from Druckmann to Tim Schafer and others) have responded positively to her videos. Druckmann says her videos inspired the writing of The Last of Us. And TLoU is the game with the most rewards ever, but yeah, clearly her videos are doing harm and making games worse because....?


You're welcome.

(Seriously, it really was. It's not a matter of "making rapists complete monsters" vs "making rapists suddenly sympathetic".)


Avatar cheap shots are allowed now? Okay. But in any case, while I don't want to get in a book vs show argument here, even despite the show's shortcomings, its handling of sexual assault is far more mature and nuanced than the cheap window dressing you see in the games shown in the video. For one thing, the women involved are actually characterized, instead of being, y'know, background decoration. Anita never said sexual abuse should never be depicted at all, she took issue with the manner in which it was.

I can think of a million examples for both genders in GoT where they are in fact not. Even using the term "cheap", some of the best parts of that show is seeing the brutality given to totally random people with minimal thought.

The woman who is about to get married (or something) used the hashtag "#iftheygunnedmedown".
As a respone, a "SJW" doxxed her (since this is a hashtag that "belongs to black people" and this is "cultural appropriation"). including name, residence, and workplace.

I wrote that post because:

Lisker said that "SJWs" are:

"Basically it's a group of people who are so very easily offended by pretty much anything and everyone that it reaches a point where no matter what you do or say will offend some tender soul out there. Hell, even calling someone "her" or "him" on tumbler can get you threatened, herassed and doxxed by the SJW out there because you did not respect their fantasy/otherkin or whatever they like to call themselves."

And lorebringer responded by saying:

"This is exaggerated nonsense and not relevant at all to this thread. Do you know what "doxxed" means? Because it doesn't happen to people who "use the wrong pronoun" "
(followed by calling him a baby indirectly)..

Ah ok, thanks

 

[Anton Sugar]

You realize that literally everything in a narrative is being used to "elaborate on the story," right? There is no such thing as an event depicted in a work of literature that "is just about the act itself," whatever the hell that means.

What do you mean? Just because something is included in a story, doesn't mean it contributes to the overall narrative or is relevant to the plot. A huge part of criticism (literature or otherwise) is concerned with this.

It's about making rapists complete monsters or depicting them as somewhat more sympathetic than complete monsters. There is a characterization spectrum that runs from nonredeemable to sympathetic and you seem to be advocating that it would be better to move the depiction of rapists further towards the sympathetic side of the spectrum.

I don't think it's necessarily about monster vs sympathetic, either. In her example, violence against women is perpetuated by the worst of the worst, complete assholes who you would meet and think, "Yeah, this guy probably treats women horribly." It's inaccurately black-and-white, especially if the goal is "realism".

 

[Innolis]

It'd be a much stronger, deeper argument than the quick overview drive-by here. Examining one or two games in depth is preferable to zipping over 6-12.

Very much agree on this. The entire series could use more focus and less examples. Still I find they've improved over time.

 

[antigoon]

Very much agree on this. The entire series could use more focus and less examples. Still I find they've improved over time.

She's examining broad trends. You're asking for something different entirely.

 

[Anton Sugar]

Very much agree on this. The entire series could use more focus and less examples. Still I find they've improved over time.

I think focusing on a wide number of examples does well to show that it's an industry-wide problem, though.

EDIT: Beaten.

 

[Brakke]

I've been talking about one game in particular where the women are characterized (one of them is the player character) but that Sarkeesian still criticizes as being an example of her trope.

"But that elf *could* be you" isn't useful. That's non-diegetic. If you haven't picked the female city elf, then that avatar gets killed in the way she shows. There's nothing in the scene there to indicate that *could* be the PC. Lots of the marketing around Dragon Age encourages starting multiple characters to see multiple origin stories play out, but the text itself never really encourages that.

You're saying "that's a bad example because that's not a scene you have to see"? But it's definitely a scene a bunch of people definitely did see. Whatever context you get from picking that character instead of encountering that character is outside the diegesis. Some games--say, 999--play around with what the diegesis means and encourage and even require you to pick up multiple different characters during one "play through", but Dragon Age isn't one of those games.

I've been talking about one game in particular where the women are characterized (one of them is the player character) but that Sarkeesian still criticizes as being an example of her trope.

In any case, Dragon Age isn't even some kind of lynchpin to her argument. Why don't you move on to explicating the context to the other examples that she's missed? Every time you say "well she's taking these scenes out of context" falls flat for me because I don't see what context you think makes her examples weak. And "well you could have picked that elf before you even knew this scene was going to happen except you didn't and now that you've seen it you still don't know that elf there is the PC city elf lady" doesn't really invalidate her inclusion of that scene to me.

 

[ChawlieTheFair]

She's examining broad trends. You're asking for something different entirely.

Not really. By doing such quick examples without further discussion and examination, she's inviting more criticism for herself. I said it before, but either longer videos or even just more of them giving a perspective from all sides for her examples would cause much less upset and frustration with her. Even though we all know her "point" with the videos and why she isn't doing them like some of us want, in the end it just makes the whole thing seem extremely biased and unfair. She's got points, but not showing/discussing them properly is just a bad idea.

 

[Anton Sugar]

She's got points, but not showing/discussing them properly is just a bad idea.

How is any of this not considered showing or discussing her points?

I explained that in the game of patriarchy, women are not the opposing team; they are actually the ball. Female characters that fall under the Background Decoration trope, however, usually don’t even rise to the level of importance necessary to be pawns in someone else’s game.

Instead these women are brought on stage for the express purpose of being victimized in front of the player, after which their battered bodies are whisked away, swept back behind the curtain, never to be heard from again.

Returning to Rockstar’s Red Dead Redemption, in most settlement areas players are treated to randomly triggered events in which female prostitutes are assaulted and murdered by johns amid a torrent of misogynistic slurs. Players are presented with the choice to either intervene and save the woman for a small cash reward or simply watch the attack play out in front of them as part of the entertainment.

These women and their bodies are sacrificed in the name of infusing “mature themes” into gaming stories. But there is nothing “mature” about flippantly evoking shades of female trauma. It ends up sensationalizing an issue which is painfully familiar to a large percentage of women on this planet while also normalizing and trivializing their experiences.

Sexual and domestic violence is at epidemic levels in the real world; one out of every five women in the United States will be raped in their lifetimes. One in four will be sexually assaulted. And women involved in prostitution are at a much higher risk of violence because they are seen as vessels to be used by others rather than as fully human.

So when games casually use sexualized violence as a ham-fisted form of character development for the “bad guys” it reinforces a popular misconception about gendered violence by framing it as something abnormal, as a cruelty only committed by the most transparently evil strangers. In reality, however, violence against women, and sexual violence in particular, is a common everyday occurrence often perpetrated by “normal men” known and trusted by those targeted.

The truth is that the vast majority of cases are committed by friends, colleagues, relatives, and intimate partners. The gendered violence epidemic is a deep-seated cultural problem present in the homes, communities and workplaces of many millions of women all over the world. It is not something that mostly happens in dark alleys at the hands of cartoon villains twisting nefarious-looking mustaches.

The audience is meant to briefly gasp at these acts of brutality, before their attention is directed elsewhere, towards the next event or set of enemies to be dispatched.

Regardless of the player’s actions in these type of situations, the result always paints women in a regressive light, as they will end up as either “helpless damsels” or “dead victims”.

On a shallow surface level, these vignettes seem to contextualize violence against women in a negative light; however, these narratives are never really about the abused women in question. Instead depictions of female pain and victimhood are flippantly summoned to serve as sideshow attractions in storylines about other things altogether.

 

[Zampano]

These videos are great and contributing hugely toward the development of gaming as a medium. Really thought provoking and superb at drawing attention to things I'd taken for granted. The wealth of examples available for Anita to draw upon speaks for itself - gaming needs to mature in its portrayal of women.

Whether you agree with the points made of not, conversation is a fantastic thing and it's shameful that a minority within our "community" are trying to shut it down.

 

[ChawlieTheFair]

How is any of this not considered showing or discussing her points?

I said properly, which I think means doing it in the way I described in my OP. For instance "violence against women is at an epidemic level", well if that's the case, which it is, it's even worse considering everybody else. She is only presenting a female perspective, which 1) not everyone will grasp and 2)those that don't grasp will attack, for feelings of themselves not being considered. If she gives an unbiased view, which admittedly will take more work and more effort on her part, she will assumingly(just a guess, but I don't see why it would be wrong) recieve less hassle, both in maturely discussed threads like these, and HOPEFULLY in places like YouTube and Twitter.

Edit: As we are bringing up the points that either don't make sense, or at the very least we feel are gender neutral. I just saw that Thunderfoot vid someone posted called " How men would be if they acted like Feminists" or something like that. Because he believes she is lying, unfair, dishonest(not saying those are true, but that's the impression he gives off) he made that video giving the gender opposite view exactly in the style she did. If she gives all sides, those videos don't happen, as they can't for there is then nothing "unfair".

 

[RedSwirl]

Anita hasn't mentioned any of Bethesda's games in her videos yet has she? If not, it's something I just noticed.

 

[Anton Sugar]

I said properly, which I think means doing it in the way I described in my OP. For instance "violence against women is at an epidemic level", well if that's the case, which it is, it's even worse considering everybody else. She is only presenting a female perspective, which 1) not everyone will grasp and 2)those that don't grasp will attack, for feelings of themselves not being considered. If she gives an unbiased view, which admittedly will take more work and more effort on her part, she will assumingly(just a guess, but I don't see why it would be wrong) recieve less hassle, both in maturely discussed threads like these, and HOPEFULLY in places like YouTube and Twitter.

Edit: As we are bringing up the points that either don't make sense, or at the very least we feel are gender neutral. I just saw that Thunderfoot vid someone posted called " How men would be if they acted like Feminists" or something like that. Because he believes she is lying, unfair, dishonest(not saying those are true, but that's the impression he gives off) he made that video giving the gender opposite view exactly in the style she did. If she gives all sides, those videos don't happen, as they can't for there is then nothing "unfair".

You say she is only presenting a female perspective--what do you mean by this, exactly? Certainly not that she should be examining the treatment of men in video games, right? Because that's not what her project is about.

"If men acted liked feminists" is tripe. It is the video embodiment of "But what about men" which has been dismantled thoroughly in the other thread by numerous posters and mods.

His "feminism poisons everything" vid is just as bad. His tendency to use hyperbole and exaggeration is annoying and makes up arguments that Anita is supposedly making (she isn't) and then he attacks those.

 

[ChawlieTheFair]

You say she is only presenting a female perspective--what do you mean by this, exactly? Certainly not that she should be examining the treatment of men in video games, right? Because that's not what her project is about.




"If men acted liked feminists" is tripe. It is the video embodiment of "But what about men" which has been dismantled thoroughly in the other thread by numerous posters and mods.




His "feminism poisons everything" vid is just as bad. His tendency to use hyperbole and exaggeration is annoying and makes up arguments that Anita is supposedly making (she isn't) and then he attacks those.

Responses follow the bolded in order:

Yes I know, her project can still be about that, but she should still present some fair counter-arguments as one would in a proper essay.

I'm not saying I agree with it, but the whole reason he has the ability to make those videos is because she is only presenting one side of the argument, rather than multiple. Herself doing so means Thunderfoot can, as she isn't.

I used Thunderfoot as an example of the really sort of hateful, some what arrogant criticism she is recieving from some YouTubers. They are pointing at the holes in her armor, if she presents the counter-arguments herself, then there will be no holes.

Edit: and in turn, it would make her seem less biased and one-sided, which is a common criticism that she recieves.

 

[Nairume]

Anita hasn't mentioned any of Bethesda's games in her videos yet has she? If not, it's something I just noticed.

She's shown Fallout 3 and New Vegas.

None of the Elder Scrolls have come up, though I'm not really sure there's as much for her to point out with them.

 

[RedSwirl]

She's shown Fallout 3 and New Vegas.

In what episodes?

None of the Elder Scrolls have come up, though I'm not really sure there's as much for her to point out with them.

That's kind of my point. Elder Scrolls and Fallout 3, in my opinion, have put players in surprisingly gender-balanced worlds. Furthermore, being RPGs, they give each character a greater average degree of interaction.

 

[aeolist]

chawlie i fundamentally disagree with your points, both that her videos appear to be biased and that reducing the supposed bias would also reduce criticism directed at her

the videos so far have been extremely even handed and well-explained, and the vast majority of criticism i've seen has been irrational and hateful garbage spewed by obviously defensive men. the kind of people who are the real problem here would not suddenly start listening and stop harassing if she were more "fair". at best it might slightly reduce the number of people who complain about cherry picking, though honestly i feel that complaint entirely misses the point anyway and would likely still continue.

 

[Almighty]

None of the Elder Scrolls have come up, though I'm not really sure there's as much for her to point out with them.

Thinking about it there really isn't. The only thing I can think of would be that stripclub or was it a brothel in Morrowind.

 

[Aaron D.]

These videos are great and contributing hugely toward the development of gaming as a medium. Really thought provoking and superb at drawing attention to things I'd taken for granted. The wealth of examples available for Anita to draw upon speaks for itself - gaming needs to mature in its portrayal of women.

Whether you agree with the points made of not, conversation is a fantastic thing and it's shameful that a minority within our "community" are trying to shut it down.

Couldn't agree more.

This past couple weeks have been stressful to bear witness to. But the honest, open dialogue that is emerging from it has been refreshing as heck.

I wonder if the MRA & anti-SJW community had any idea just how badly this would blow up in their faces. Sometimes it just takes grievous and desperate actions by a few hate groups to make the community at large to wake up, take notice and say, "Enough!"

 

[aeolist]

i also think that the people i've seen going "wait ok sure there's a scene in X game where the bad guy personally knifes 20 prostitutes but you need to put it in context because it's also got a lot of socially progressive themes and content" are missing the point

having good stuff doesn't mean the bad stuff just doesn't exist, for that matter it just makes it stick out worse.

 

[Brakke]

In what episodes?

That's kind of my point. Elder Scrolls and Fallout 3, in my opinion, have put players in surprisingly gender-balanced worlds. Furthermore, being RPGs, they give each character a greater average degree of interaction.

Thinking about it there really isn't. The only thing I can think of would be that stripclub or was it a brothel in Morrowind.

Fallout New Vegas is in the last Background Decoration episode, there's some ghoul prostitutes. I don't think it was a particularly strong example.

 

[RedSwirl]

Fallout New Vegas is in the last Background Decoration episode, there's some ghoul prostitutes. I don't think it was a particularly strong example.

Yeah I just remembered that. Background Decoration characters are an exception more than a rule in Bethesda games though.

 

[Almighty]

Fallout New Vegas is in the last Background Decoration episode, there's some ghoul prostitutes. I don't think it was a particularly strong example.

You are correct, but I was thinking more about examples in the Elder Scrolls series and that Morrwind example was all that I could think of.

 

[Brakke]

Yeah I just remembered that. Background Decoration characters are an exception more than a rule in Bethesda games though.

You are correct, but I was thinking more about examples in the Elder Scrolls series and that Morrwind example was all that I could think of.

Hah I was just trying to remember if there were brothels in Skyrim at all, couldn't remember any. Came up with this gem:

http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/615803-/61141623

It is a medieval world, brothels and similar agencies have been around even before the dark ages in this world, and yet, there is not a single brothel or woman of the night (polite way of saying it, maybe) in all of Skyrim? Even in the sketchy town of Riften? Its a odd thing to get worked up over I admit, but the lack of such makes no sense given the worlds setting. Brothels are even mentioned in one of the "Wolf Queen" books.

Lol goddamnit.

 

[The Blue Jihad]

She's examining broad trends. You're asking for something different entirely.

It's difficult to examine a broad trend when you're only including tiny snippets from 6 games, though. She's already taking a tiny sampling of content and extrapolating, so all the more reason to really laser focus on one or two games at a time and really explore them, relative to the topic.

Over time, she'll still establish and examine the broad trend but she'll be doing it with a much stronger analysis for each game/video. Less hopping around, more focus.

 

[stupei]

Hah I was just trying to remember if there were brothels in Skyrim at all, couldn't remember any. Came up with this gem:

http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/615803-/61141623



Lol goddamnit.

Now where did that person who kept demanding proof that people suggest exploitation of female bodies is necessary for realism wander off to...

 

[Tomohawk]

i also think that the people i've seen going "wait ok sure there's a scene in X game where the bad guy personally knifes 20 prostitutes but you need to put it in context because it's also got a lot of socially progressive themes and content" are missing the point

having good stuff doesn't mean the bad stuff just doesn't exist, for that matter it just makes it stick out worse.

I think when people talk about context, they want people to examine the themes and events surrounding why 20 prostitutes are stabbed. The knifing of 20 prostitutes in a game doesn't automatically fall under bad stuff.

 

[aeolist]

I think when people talk about context, they want people to examine the themes and events surrounding why 20 prostitutes are stabbed. The knifing of 20 prostitutes in a game doesn't automatically fall under bad stuff.

but i think she's done exactly that. all of the examples i saw in this video had their in-game context pretty well explained.

sure, killing a woman can be done in a game. i would just agree with anita that in these examples as well as most other games that feature such content, it's not done well enough to justify its existence.

 

[Tomohawk]

but i think she's done exactly that. all of the examples i saw in this video had their in-game context pretty well explained.

sure, killing a woman can be done in a game. i would just agree with anita that in these examples as well as most other games that feature such content, it's not done well enough to justify its existence.

I haven't played much of the games she talked about, but what makes a good killing of a woman in a game and what makes a bad killing of a woman in a game?

lols that was weird to type.

 

[ChawlieTheFair]

chawlie i fundamentally disagree with your points, both that her videos appear to be biased and that reducing the supposed bias would also reduce criticism directed at her

the videos so far have been extremely even handed and well-explained, and the vast majority of criticism i've seen has been irrational and hateful garbage spewed by obviously defensive men. the kind of people who are the real problem here would not suddenly start listening and stop harassing if she were more "fair". at best it might slightly reduce the number of people who complain about cherry picking, though honestly i feel that complaint entirely misses the point anyway and would likely still continue.

But that's where almost of the criticism is based, even here on Gaf, and it's not without base, on her "cherry picking content that she morphs into supporting her argument". You wanna silence "But Men Too!!!" critics and other aggressive talkers? You give *their* side. Feel free to then disprove their side, but you should give it. People will listen to reason if and when it's given correctly.

but i think she's done exactly that. all of the examples i saw in this video had their in-game context pretty well explained.

sure, killing a woman can be done in a game. i would just agree with anita that in these examples as well as most other games that feature such content, it's not done well enough to justify its existence.

And again, this is where part of my argument, and some of the argument from "But Men Too!" people come in: Blowing the balls of a guy with a shotgun isn't ringing as a problem for her (or at least she hasn't mentioned it yet), but a woman getting her throat slit does. However you wanna frame it, both incidents of violence exsist purely for player entertainment, but she brings up one and not the other.

 

[Oersted]

But that's where almost of the criticism is based, even here on Gaf, and it's not without base, on her "cherry picking content that she morphs into supporting her argument". You wanna silence "But Men Too!!!" critics and other aggressive talkers? You give *their* side. Feel free to then disprove their side, but you should give it. People will listen to reason if and when it's given correctly.

What cherrypicking are you talking about?

 

[aeolist]

I haven't played much of the games she talked about, but what makes a good killing of a woman in a game and what makes a bad killing of a woman in a game?

lols that was weird to type.

if the villain and the victim are both fully realized characters with their own motivation and agency that helps. using the murder of nameless women as shorthand for "this guy/world is bad!" is lazy.

in any case it's more about the overall trend, which is the point of these videos. this kind of female representation in games happens all the time.

 

[aeolist]

And again, this is where part of my argument, and some of the argument from "But Men Too!" people come in: Blowing the balls of a guy with a shotgun isn't ringing as a problem for her (or at least she hasn't mentioned it yet), but a woman getting her throat slit does. However you wanna frame it, both incidents of violence exsist purely for player entertainment, but she brings up one and not the other.

all i can say is that not everything has to be about men all the time, and she shouldn't be criticized for only talking about women's issues if that's what's important to her

it's as simple as that

 

[Toxi]

Hah I was just trying to remember if there were brothels in Skyrim at all, couldn't remember any. Came up with this gem:

http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/615803-/61141623

Lol goddamnit.

People think the absence of a brothel is more notably unrealistic than not explaining what the hell these people do with their poo.

 

[ChawlieTheFair]

What cherrypicking are you talking about?

The one that caused the most *outrage* was in the previous episode with Hitman: Absolution. She was showing clips of the game that took place in a strip club, and was killing strippers, then dragged the dead bodies around in circles. Her argument along the lines of "these sexualized women only serve as objects for a male player's enjoyment". It was considered cherry picking for a couple of reasons. What I considered the most telling one was that during her GTAV segment, she made a point of how players were encouraged to kill hookers because they would drop small amounts of cash when killed. However in Hitman, the game would dock you massive points for both killing an innocent and not hiding the bodies. She flipped the argument one way but didn't like it the other. The other reasons mostly related to the fact that the game actively encouraged players with an ever-updating scoreboard that was always present to only kill your intended target and to not be seen. In a part where most players were sneaking through the strip club, she was just chocking them out or punching them to death for the sake of the video.

all i can say is that not everything has to be about men all the time, and she shouldn't be criticized for only talking about women's issues if that's what's important to her

it's as simple as that

I can more than agree that not everything has to always be about men, but from a feminist perspective, a movement which at its base is about equality, why would you not discuss sexual violence occuring to both genders? And that's not even going into the fact that she is discussing a very heavy subject where she is recieving quite a lot of support. To not discuss it and showcase it to it's full depths is quite frankly unfair and perhaps irresponsible.

 

[Tomohawk]

if the villain and the victim are both fully realized characters with their own motivation and agency that helps. using the murder of nameless women as shorthand for "this guy/world is bad!" is lazy.

in any case it's more about the overall trend, which is the point of these videos. this kind of female representation in games happens all the time.

I think using the murder of nameless women, as the only thing to make someone/world seem evil is lazy, but if its in addition to other character building I don't think its bad.

But ya its more about a trend then individual cases.

 

[aeolist]

I can more than agree that not everything has to always be about men, but from a feminist perspective, a movement which at its base is about equality, why would you not discuss sexual violence occuring to both genders? And that's not even going into the fact that she is discussing a very heavy subject where she is recieving quite a lot of support. To not discuss it and showcase it to it's full depths is quite frankly unfair and perhaps irresponsible.

oh are you talking about sexual violence specifically? because other than far cry 3 i can't think of a single game that contains sexual violence against men, so that would be a short segment

and the people who donated to anita's kickstarter and supported her efforts did so knowing that the name of the series is "tropes vs women in video games". nobody had any reasonable expectation that she would be covering issues of male representation at all. now if someone (read: not MRAs, 4chan, reddit, or any of the crazies who have descended upon anita's videos) wanted to do a video series about men's issues in games i would be all for it because that shit can be pretty fucked up too, but overall it's not as much of a problem simply because there's alternatives to the bad stuff.

 

[CambriaRising]

oh are you talking about sexual violence specifically? because other than far cry 3 i can't think of a single game that contains sexual violence against men, so that would be a short segment

Off the top of my head, FEAR 2 has the main character

Spoiler

being raped by Alma.

But its not a terribly common thing to happen in games.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

oh are you talking about sexual violence specifically? because other than far cry 3 i can't think of a single game that contains sexual violence against men, so that would be a short segment

and the people who donated to anita's kickstarter and supported her efforts did so knowing that the name of the series is "tropes vs women in video games". nobody had any reasonable expectation that she would be covering issues of male representation at all. now if someone (read: not MRAs, 4chan, reddit, or any of the crazies who have descended upon anita's videos) wanted to do a video series about men's issues in games i would be all for it because that shit can be pretty fucked up too, but overall it's not as much of a problem simply because there's alternatives to the bad stuff.

Far Cry 3 and FEAR 2, both of which involve sexual assault in which the evil woman explicitly wants

Spoiler

to steal your character's sperm and get pregnant.

 

[aeolist]

Far Cry 3 and FEAR 2, both of which involve sexual assault in which the evil woman explicitly wants

Spoiler

to steal your character's sperm and get pregnant.

i stand corrected, clearly this is a major issue that should be covered as soon as possible

i'll start a petition on change.org right away

 

[ChawlieTheFair]

oh are you talking about sexual violence specifically? because other than far cry 3 i can't think of a single game that contains sexual violence against men, so that would be a short segment

and the people who donated to anita's kickstarter and supported her efforts did so knowing that the name of the series is "tropes vs women in video games". nobody had any reasonable expectation that she would be covering issues of male representation at all. now if someone (read: not MRAs, 4chan, reddit, or any of the crazies who have descended upon anita's videos) wanted to do a video series about men's issues in games i would be all for it because that shit can be pretty fucked up too, but overall it's not as much of a problem simply because there's alternatives to the bad stuff.

If we are talking sexual violence, I can think of several, one in particular that is far nastier than anything Sarkeesian has showed, and surprisingly enough from a very well known and recent game.

For your kickstarter point, I do suppose that's fair enough, they donated to a female perspective, didn't think about that.

Edit: Oh didn't think we were giving examples, but oh well.

From Outlast: Whistleblower, the torture scene. I've got a youtube link ready to go, but it's probably one of the most fucked up things i've seen in media in general. People who have seen it know what I'm talking about it. I don't think it'd be
smart to link it.

i stand corrected, clearly this is a major issue that should be covered as soon as possible

i'll start a petition on change.org right away

I'm assuming you're joking, but while the Far Cry 3 one was admittedly just being sexy fun time oh this chick is naked, the FEAR 2 one was getting legitimately raped by a zombie/ghost woman.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

It's about making rapists complete monsters or depicting them as somewhat more sympathetic than complete monsters. There is a characterization spectrum that runs from nonredeemable to sympathetic and you seem to be advocating that it would be better to move the depiction of rapists further towards the sympathetic side of the spectrum.

Not exactly, that's an oversimplification.

I can think of a million examples for both genders in GoT where they are in fact not. Even using the term "cheap", some of the best parts of that show is seeing the brutality given to totally random people with minimal thought.

Oh wow. If you can't see the difference between how GoT handles the subject with how the games shown in the video handle it, then I don't know what to tell you.

 

[Brakke]

From Outlast: Whistleblower, the torture scene. I've got a youtube link ready to go, but it's probably one of the most fucked up things i've seen in media in general. People who have seen it know what I'm talking about it. I don't think it'd be smart to link it.

Please go ahead, I'm interested to see. Just mark it NSFW appropriately or whatever. If you're not comfortable anyway, PM it to me?

It's hard to discuss the media if not going to actually look at it >.<

 

[ChawlieTheFair]

Please go ahead, I'm interested to see. Just mark it NSFW appropriately or whatever. If you're not comfortable anyway, PM it to me?

It's hard to discuss the media if not going to actually look at it >.<

K here it is then, I'm dead serious BTW, if you've got problems with gore/torture, seriously don't watch it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7Av_mqJ1z8

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

"But that elf *could* be you" isn't useful. That's non-diegetic. If you haven't picked the female city elf, then that avatar gets killed in the way she shows. There's nothing in the scene there to indicate that *could* be the PC. Lots of the marketing around Dragon Age encourages starting multiple characters to see multiple origin stories play out, but the text itself never really encourages that.

You're saying "that's a bad example because that's not a scene you have to see"? But it's definitely a scene a bunch of people definitely did see. Whatever context you get from picking that character instead of encountering that character is outside the diegesis. Some games--say, 999--play around with what the diegesis means and encourage and even require you to pick up multiple different characters during one "play through", but Dragon Age isn't one of those games.

I fail to see how a five-second snippet of dialog is more representative of the game as a work than the totality of the content of the game. It doesn't make sense to arbitrarily select an isolated scene from a work of art or entertainment and then ignore the rest of it as irrelevant. An given scene is only objectionable if it is representative of the work as a whole. When people analyze Shakespeare's treatment of Jews, for instance, they don't just cite a single line of dialog, they attempt to account for his entire oeuvre.

In any case, Dragon Age isn't even some kind of lynchpin to her argument. Why don't you move on to explicating the context to the other examples that she's missed? Every time you say "well she's taking these scenes out of context" falls flat for me because I don't see what context you think makes her examples weak. And "well you could have picked that elf before you even knew this scene was going to happen except you didn't and now that you've seen it you still don't know that elf there is the PC city elf lady" doesn't really invalidate her inclusion of that scene to me.

I don't disagree with her argument, which is that there's a lot of objectionable content in games. What I disagree with is her implication that these tropes are by their nature objectionable irrespective of their context within the game, such that a game like Dragon Age is similarly objectionable to a game like of God of War in its treatment of women, or even objectionable in the same way. It only makes sense to me to analyze a given game on its own merits: the prevalence of these tropes in the medium does not somehow make their usage in any individual game problematic.

Anyway, with regard to Dragon Age, here are things I think make its depiction of sexual assault less problematic: it's not in the game principally to titillate men, the female characters aren't overtly sexualized, the game allows you to subvert the man rescues woman dynamic by playing as the female character, it serves a clear purpose in allowing the player to deepen their understanding of the setting. I'm perfectly fine with people finding the scene objectionable, but it doesn't make sense to find it objectionable for the reasons she enunciates since most of them don't apply.

 

[Brakke]

K here it is then, I'm dead serious BTW, if you've got problems with gore/torture, seriously don't watch it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7Av_mqJ1z8

WELP you weren't joking, I'm pretty sure I couldn't handle playing that game damn. Might be worth it, that was pretty fascinating.

The horror of the scene is that the mad doctor is trying to surgically modify the male PC into a woman... so he can rape and impregnate the PC. There's way more layers there than I'm willing to peel back right now.

 

[ProfessorLobo]

I enjoyed the video. I don't play AAA games anymore and I think this is part of the reason why. These games are fucked.

Although I think NMH2 did it ironically.

 

[Bold One]

Anita hasn't mentioned any of Bethesda's games in her videos yet has she? If not, it's something I just noticed.

.