Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[lijacote]

Add in that Anita's solution to problems tend to miss the point and are garbage, that she doesn't have games that "do it right", and never dives too deep beyond just stating a problem without support beyond a few examples that tend to be poor.

And frankly I am starting to dislike her more just thinking about it.

She's made a hypothetical video game with a princess character that escapes some castle using her own power. I'll see if I can find it. I think you're attacking her without being completely aware of what she thinks, and what she aims to do. The point isn't to gaze in awe at how wonderful games are, the point is to look at tropes against women. You'll find a celebration of games elsewhere.

Here's the hypothetical game. Or rather the storyline of it, with perhaps some gameplay mechanics -- the aim is to show that you don't need to have weak women to have a good game. Which is EXACTLY what some people have claimed, that games just wouldn't work without these tropes.

[Neonivek]

She's made a hypothetical video game with a princess character that escapes some castle using her own power

As an example of a Damsel in Distress... Except she missed the point she isn't a Damsel in Distress.

Worse yet is that in the end all it is, is decrying the idea of the "Princess" character. Only when she sheds the fact that she is a Princess and just takes up a sword and fights, is she considered a worthwhile character.

" I think you're attacking her without being completely aware of what she thinks, and what she aims to do"

Am I?

"The point isn't to gaze in awe at how wonderful games are, the point is to look at tropes against women"

Which is kind of where I am coming from. She does it poorly. At least when it comes to me disliking her.

I am only listing things people could legitimately dislike her for. Whether or not she makes good points anyhow.

[Reelya]

@lijacote - passive aggressive, deliberately obfuscating and strawmaning peoples arguments. Don't pretend to take the high ground here.

the plagiarism part was specifically about the two separate female fan-art creators. We already repeatedly said that the Let's Play videos were just a sideline - from the very first moment they were mentioned, and YOU KNOW IT.

Fan art is not "let's play videos", they are original works, even if they're inspired by another work. You are deliberately conflating the issues.

I'll relink the information if that helps. Both these contain open letters or direct statements from the artists involved.

http://cowkitty.net/post/78808973663/you-stole-my-artwork-an-open-letter-to-anita
http://www.destructoid.com/another-artist-speaks-about-having-their-work-used-by-feminist-frequency-271996.phtml?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

[Leafsnail]

By all means. Go and encourage those Let's Players to claim copyright for something they don't own. By all means. You're also mistaking the meaning of plagiarism: the using of source material for analysis is not plagiarism. That's research. I really think that is a completely idiotic line of argument. Go back to complaining about specific games not being totally sexist. Because that means that sexist tropes aren't ubiquitous.
rolls eyes forcefully

You've misunderstood my point: she's used videos that other people took the time to record without crediting those people or even acknowledging that she didn't record them herself.  Does that not amount to her claiming someone else's work as her own, ie plagiarism?  There's also the issue of using other people's art without permission in her Kickstarter campaign.

You've also decided to make a personal attack.  Are you referring to anything I've said in the past, or did you just feel like taking a baseless swipe at me?  I can see that there is systematic sexism in videogames but I think that Anita's analysis is almost always weak or self-contradictory, which means she is not an effective communicator on this issue.

[lijacote]

@lijacote - passive aggressive, deliberately obfuscating and strawmaning peoples arguments. Don't pretend to take the high ground here.

I'm pretty sure I've been rather open about my aggression. But hey. Let's not look at how that issue has actually been resolved. Let's just keep on pretending that Anita is a no-conscience thief, and that this is somehow relevant to her analysis of gamer culture. Attack her person, that's a good strategy if I ever saw one.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

It's not.

As an example of a Damsel in Distress... Except she missed the point she isn't a Damsel in Distress.

No, that's the trope subverted. She is a damsel that rescues herself just fine, and does so without the game falling into the pitfalls of lazy writing or gender stereotyping. That is what a good game would look like according to her -- will you continue complaining about the lack of good games being pointed at?

[Neonivek]

will you continue complaining about the lack of good games being pointed at?

The reason I do that believe it or not is because she never really collects her points together and often doesn't offer good solutions to problems.

A real game that was tangible... a real movie, a real book... anything... would help understand her better.

But she never nails down herself.

No, that's the trope subverted.

She "rescues herself" as part of the backstory AFTER she is no longer a "damsel". She becomes as stereotypical action hero afterwards. AKA she was never the Damsel in Distress, at least no more then Solid Snake is.

As well while it can be considered Subverted... it wasn't Subverted because "She was actually strong the entire time"... it was because "I decided that being a princess is the bad".

The reason why I don't accept it is because it ONLY amounts to that the solution to the Damsel in Distress trope... is... Don't use it.

If she saved herself but was still a "damsel" I would have accepted it. It would have been even more poignant because it would mean that in order to be a strong person you don't have to beat people up with a sword. That being something other then the stereotypical hero can be strong as well.

does so without the game falling into the pitfalls of lazy writing or gender stereotyping

You know... ignoring that it does... What with the whole "casting off femininity in order to become a warrior" trope

[Eagle_eye]

I suggest you look into what Anita and other feminists actually think sexism is.

You mean what some feminists think sexism is. The whole "patriarchy is the original power imbalance from which all others stem, everyone is bound to the dictates of their culture and it's impossible to understand things you haven't personally experienced therefore you're sexist no matter what, blah de blah de blah" crap is a minority view, and with good reason: culture is a label applied to certain widespread patterns of behavior, it's not some magical real thing that forces people to behave a certain way. People, especially those who are past the whole childhood trusting everyone phase, are no more bound to behave in a way typical of their culture than they are to imitate everyone around them, because those are the exact same thing.

[Neonivek]

Also Anita doesn't speak for the majority of Feminists anyhow.

[lijacote]

So, unless she points at a real game that is without issue, rather than highlighting how you could do a game without this damaging trope, it doesn't count? That's dishonest. I see nothing constructive in this. She has pointed at what would be good -- you can refuse to take that into account. I can then proceed to think that you're just stubbornly opposed, rather than actually, critically opposed.

You mean what some feminists think sexism is. The whole "patriarchy is the original power imbalance from which all others stem, everyone is bound to the dictates of their culture and it's impossible to understand things you haven't personally experienced therefore you're sexist no matter what, blah de blah de blah" crap is a minority view, and with good reason: culture is a label applied to certain widespread patterns of behavior, it's not some magical real thing that forces people to behave a certain way. People, especially those who are past the whole childhood trusting everyone phase, are no more bound to behave in a way typical of their culture than they are to imitate everyone around them, because those are the exact same thing.

As a Marxist feminist (not a knock-off, sorry, whoever it was that thought that would be a good insult), I don't think that patriarchy is the original power imbalance. Some feminists do think that patriarchy is the original power imbalance, sure. Also, nobody's claimed that culture forces you into a certain mould, it guides you into a certain mould. We can not escape culture -- to think that we're somehow separate and free from its influence is being free from thought. It affects us. Deny this at your own cost.

That is not, however, to say that we disagree on what sexism is. Sexism is a part of our culture, it is an attitude. It is the assertion that men are this, women are that, among others. No matter its role in the formation of the class society.

The reason why I don't accept it is because it ONLY amounts to that the solution to the Damsel in Distress trope... is... Don't use it.

That's a pretty bald lie. The only reason? Well, ok. Yes, Anita does urge us not to use that trope. It's bad, for reasons that she goes into. She gives us alternatives, like that hypothetical game concept. That's not just "don't use it", that's an analysis and an approach at a solution. She can not pretend to solve this trope, or hell, save us from lazy writing, or sexism, but she's certainly in the right direction.

[Neonivek]

That's a pretty bald lie. The only reason? Well, ok. Yes, Anita does urge us not to use that trope. It's bad, for reasons that she goes into. She gives us alternatives, like that hypothetical game concept. That's not just "don't use it", that's an analysis and an approach at a solution. She can not pretend to solve this trope, or hell, save us from lazy writing, or sexism, but she's certainly in the right direction

Doesn't matter, her ONLY solution is "don't use it" she doesn't give any indication of proper use or even go in depth enough that you could sort of understand.

She is making a video to educate people...

If this was just her posting a hypothetical take that to the Damsel in Distress trope in a forum somewhere or a separate video... I'd be fine with that... but this is her "solution", this is basically the entire thesis of her video in a nutshell.

She never gets the appeal of the Damsel character or expands upon it... She never gets into the solid differences between male and female damsels... She switches between plot and metaplot without indicating the difference.

[lijacote]

Proper use of a trope? That's not the subject matter of her videos. She means to point at a problem. To argue that it exists. If you think she doesn't go enough into what should be done, fine, but is she wrong, then? Or do you, in fact, actually disagree with her on more than just her supposed lack of instruction for a better world?

And no, that's not her thesis in a nutshell. That's, again, dishonest. She goes into the history of tropes against women, she goes into the effects those tropes have -- that's simply not "don't use it". Stop lying.

Oh wow. You keep editing in more reasons to dislike her and her videos all the time. I guess your earlier "the only reason" was... a bald lie.

Gonna stop posting here for a while, since this is completely pointless. I address one point, you jump to another. I address that point, you jump back to the first one, claiming that whatever she did was not enough. No point is ever finished, no counter-argument ever enough. Nothing is enough, is it. Not to worry, I trust that a proper anti-Anita circle-jerk will suffice just as well as this discussion.

[Helgoland]

As a Marxist feminist (not a knock-off, sorry, whoever it was that thought that would be a good insult), I don't think that patriarchy is the original power imbalance.

Marxist feminist

There's the rub. If you actually are a Marxist feminist, your way of thinking is very, very far away from that of most people on this forum. I'd suggest that everybody keep in mind that we're discussing sexism, not Marxist feminism.

[Neonivek]

Proper use of a trope? That's not the subject matter of her videos. She means to point at a problem. To argue that it exists. If you think she doesn't go enough into what should be done, fine, but is she wrong, then? Or do you, in fact, actually disagree with her on more than just her supposed lack of instruction for a better world?

And no, that's not her thesis in a nutshell. That's, again, dishonest. She goes into the history of tropes against women, she goes into the effects those tropes have -- that's simply not "don't use it". Stop lying.

The thing is lijacote is I don't like her videos not because I disagree with them, I agree with most of her points, but because they are just badly made and don't go into enough depth, she takes the audience agreement for granted at several points, and her examples are just plain bad...

When I saw her first video I thought it was an introduction... I should she was skimming and then was going to break it down in her next video... All her videos are like the first.

But a lot of it is just pointing at things.

Damsel in Distress trope being overused to depower otherwise competent female characters for the sake of a male protagonist, or where their abuse is used to inspire them and used for cheap shock? Yeah Anita its so true, but can you do a bit more.

Her videos are, as I say, mediocre.

Showing the proper use of a trope, as well as a disambiguation that its overabundance is bad even if used properly, could have cemented home the entire argument (Also the hypothetical game I think wasn't made by her, it was made by someone else). Her hypothetical game being nothing more then "Damsel decides not to be a damsel" just basically destroys any nuance or depth she could have attempted and creates other problems unintentionally. It was so useless in the overall grand scheme of things.

She might as well have said that there is no circumstances where a female character should be disempowered or victimized.

[Reelya]

Her damsel subversion game might be ok, but I kind of wonder "then what?". It's exactly a 1 trick pony, and like Neonivek says it plays out like a standard hero narrative all the way through to the end.

Look, it even falls into the "I'll make a man out of you" trope she detailed in her thesis: she gets captured, and escapes, but that doesn't make her a damsel any more than a MAN getting captured and escapes is a damsel. All the stuff she does is stuff a masculine hero does, and her thesis pointed out that this is just not progressive at all.

I'll give her the benefit of the doubt though, and say she's realized the "hippie shit" she promoted in her thesis, doesn't work in a game, much less than it would on a TV show. Action games sort of railroad creators into a certain type of narrative which is much narrower than you can get away with in TV or film media. Action game heroes being the singular hero who "does" fall straight into the heroic archetype, and can't really be portrayed as the nurturing collective-decision-maker and still have an engaging and interesting game.

Hell, it happens in Prince of Persia pretty much exactly like this game idea. Her game might as well be called Princess of Persia, and play exactly like Prince of Persia, with the only "twist" and not much of a twist, being the overthrow of the monarchy and formation of a republic at the end. So, effectively it's just a regular game with a female lead character, it doesn't even blaze trails in terms of genre. And if reforming the entire game market was just as simple as that, then it would have happened already.

===

I really want to look at the EEDAR data for individual games. We know that on average a game with a female protagonist gets less marketing budget, but what would answer a lot of questions would be to compare games with the same marketing budget. Clearly, some games get bigger or smaller marketing budgets, regardless of gender. Not every male-lead game has the same huge budget.

If there's an untapped market for more action games with a female protagonist, you should see existing games of this type selling "above their weight" relative to the marketing budget they get - the male games should be at market saturation point, with so many to choose from, that those who prefer a female protagonist should be supporting those games when they come out.

We can assume however that the people who make games and allocate marketing budget are not morons - they know how much money they spent on each game, and how much sales that generated per dollar spent. If there was this huge unmet demand for more female-lead action games I bet they would have picked that up in their sales data, because you know, they're about making money, and they HAVE this data.

[Neonivek]

My personal theory Reelya is that well...

If you play a lot of games with female protagonists you generally see a lot of total garbage ones that are targeted towards horny people with no taste.

But the people at marketing don't see the difference. They don't see the difference between X-Blades (I think that was the name) and say Tomb Raider or Metroid Prime.

Hell, it happens in Prince of Persia pretty much exactly like this game idea. Her game might as well be called Princess of Persia

If you pay attention the gameplay takes place AFTER she already pretty much rescued herself after she taken several levels of fighter and pretty much thrown away all her princess attributes (which I only harp on because this is the "Damsel in distress" section... >_<)

It is pretty much an open ended narrative but with a sarcastic opening cinematic. Making it a comedy game, mostly about making fun of clichés.