Is taxonomy also a poison to analysis?
If it replaces analysis I'd say so. "Here is a thing that happens, here is a list of the works in which it happens (and some works in which it does not happen)" isn't really analysis. You'd need to at least look at why the author(s) including that thing which happened in order to make it analysis.
As Leafsnail said, labeling is ultimately pointless if it doesn't reflect some underlying truth. TvTrope's categories are only applicable in cases of strict adherence to genre formula and not reflective of any underlying ontology. While it's perfectly fine for analyzing harem anime no. 3792 stamped out by the kaleidoscopes at the Muck House, looking at any literature page shows the incompatibility of their system with anything falling outside of these strict guidelines. It's tautology at it's finest, as tropes only apply to works that were created with genre tropes in mind.
I find this sad to see. Investig8iveJournalism's stuff on the gaming press and the ME3 debacle, while a tad polemical, showed a certain degree of promise. It's unfortunate to see that he's part of Reddit's MRA crazies. His video is pointlessly anti-academic and anti-intellectual, and he doesn't seem to understand the idea of a bibliography (either supporting plagiarism or opposing referencing the work of others). He doesn't have any grasp of modern feminism, stating (without citation) that sex-positive feminists are a small, silenced minority, when in reality during the third wave the radical feminists suffered losses and were heavily marginalized to the point of only being bandied about when a right-wing commentator wants to discredit feminism as a whole. His attacks on Sarkeesian moderating her YouTube comments fall flat, as hers seem to have attracted an order of magnitude greater of death threats and shitposting, which given YouTube's normal quality is fairly telling. Rebutting Sarkeesian's arguments is where he fails the most. Regardless of what you think of Bayonetta's position as a progressive/sexist work, an add where subway patrons undress a billboard is undeniably sexist, and the reason Japanese trains need women-only cars is because certain individuals, perhaps the Japanese equivalent of Redditors, are unable to respect a woman's right to travel without being molested.
Now I'm sort of worried. On this forum, where I assumed people would be reasonable about this, I'm the only one who doesn't seem to like Anita Sensaasian (bad pun, I know) or her work.
It's not that I am anti-feminist or anything of the sort; in fact, thanks, in part, to my own mother's life story, I am quite forward about the equality of females in our culture, even though I'm a male. But there is a certain healthy chunk of modern feminism (by no means the majority, but still significant) which I absolutely cannot agree with, the one where Sarkeesian stands. If I weren't so afraid of being labeled as a right-wing bigot by the ignorant, I would call them "feminazis" (I know, point out the irony between "right-wing bigot" and "-nazi"). I disagree fundamentally with the mistaken belief that women have already achieved perfect equality; there is still much room for improvement (i.e. wages, reproductive rights, etc.). But extreme feminists like Sarkeesian pretend that things are worse than the really are in a pitiful attempt at playing the victim card. Yes, video games tend to present a rather-unfavorable image of women (I personally don't even find any of the women in her poster remotely attractive, either). But the typical feminist argument against this has two problems:
1. Demographic-wise, even though there is an ever-increasing percentage of female gamers, it is still a male-dominated sector of the entertainment industry. I do believe that a more egalitarian gaming culture would be universally beneficial, but this is not the case at the moment. But Sarkeesian's viewpoint, which overall is that sexy/innocent/in-distress virtual females are demeaning to females as a whole. Even though, y'know, they're individuals. And not real. For feminists and moral guardians like Sarkeesian to police the industry and tell heterosexual males (and a few lesbians, too) that they can't see anything attractive in women is to return to the sexual mores of the ironically-patriarchal Victorian era.
2. Most games aren't that bad in the female-depiction department. Moreover, feminist critiques of the subject always seem to pick on the wrong games. For example, Samus from Metroid is a determined, strong, planet-saving female warrior. Her gender is never important to the gameplay or story; it's not even discovered until the end of the first game. But obviously, by having a typically "attractive" figure, she is just, as Sarkeesian would say in her sensationalist style, a "Fighting F***toy". And, hell, if being attractive is tantamount to being demeaning to an entire gender, what about Alyx Vance? She's intelligent, helpful, badass, and skilled in various technical fields. Oh, but guess what? She's wearing slightly-too-tight jeans, a slightly-too-tight sweatshirt, and a face that's not quite in the uncanny valley. Too attractive, symbol of patriarchy.
I'm not targeting anyone here in particular, just that you're all being unexpectedly apologetic and defensive about Sarkeesian's work, and ranting on the invalidity of arguments against it, even perfectly logical ones.
First, you should probably exercise more caution when making comparisons to Nazis. I don't think the desire to not be sexually objectified in media is in any way comparable to the desire to commit genocide.
Second, while good taste certainly ends at a fine line, there's a massive gap between "attractive female" and "bizarre fetish creature with tits larger than her head", and not all game studios are capable of recognizing this. She likely chose fighting games because many have become progressively worse in this area.
Not my imageSamus is another great example of the problem, as Nintendo decided to have her character re-written by a crazy Japanese misogynist.
There have been quite a few criticisms of Sarkeesian in this thread, as she is a self-obsessed primadonna of pop-postmodernism who has yet to produce anything of value and is a poor mouthpiece for any cause. However, this doesn't fix the numerous logical and factual errors in Investig8iveJournalism's video and sticking your head in the sand and denying that there are any problems with the portrayal of women in videogames is unlikely to win you many allies outside of Reddit.
Author
Topic: When Kickstarter goes wrong? (Read 673447 times)