Print

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

[Loud Whispers]

I'm sorry if I've completely misunderstood you, but I still don't get your point. That generalizations are bad?

Summed it up nice and simple.

I've never said that the entire gaming industry is sexist, just that rampant sexism in the industry was a problem. Even if only half the industry is sexist it would still be a problem, and I think it's much more than half. Heck, even if it was less than half it could still be a problem worth discussing.

I never said you said I said that you said anything because bla bla bla.

In short I have a personal philosophy of not holding any information up to someone's image, it's why I like anonymous discussions: It's very hard to discredit or prove any one point solely based off of one's misdemeanors or merits, you get pure distilled discussion of information.

It seems you think I would wish all discussion of sexism in games to cease. The post you got that from was in reply to this:

I agree that it has been changing recently, but it has only been changing because now there are a bunch of people trying to actively point it out."

Which was indeed a generalization that did not take note of changing views of consumers to a more progressive stance. One of the very good criticisms of Anita is that the games she is pulling from are very old and she completely ignores all of the subversions, or that some of the things she based her argument on were weak examples or downright wrong. Hence scooby doo.
And then the replies which caused confusion were based on this post:

You give the average consumer waaaaay too much credit. Also, you underestimate the ability cultural norms to keep people from thinking about things. Humans simply don't pay attention to things that are 'normal'. They just don't.

Another generalization disregarding the above, saying that people would be incapable of noting obvious dehumanization.

So let's be clear: What is your stance on the issue?

My stance is that there is a problem, and that it is one that is aided by raising people's awareness of the issue. I've worked in the industry, I've worked firsthand with developers and artists. I've known people actually making games who didn't realize that some of the stuff they did was sexist until someone pointed it out. I also know that a lot of the problem is management and PR folks who know damn well that they're objectifying women with their characterizations and justify it by saying that Sex Sells.

I feel much the same way, the difference comes from what is defined as sexist. Dehumanizing and objectifying is an obvious equality issue, both males and females are frequently sexualized and thrown into the damsel role but females have been the more common victim of the resonating trope GG talked about where the damsel is reduced to a prize to be won by the protagonist.

This is pretty much dead in modern mainstream games.

I searched up some lists of the top mainstream games and got directed to these:
http://www.cpugamer.com/editorial/the-top-10-mainstream-pc-games-of-2011
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-01-23-the-most-popular-games-on-xbox-live-in-2012-were

Whether it be the heroic valkyrie cogs of Gears of War to the silent protagonist of Chell from Portal or simply the background characters of Magicka or Dead Space, Anita's video does not apply to or is downright subverted by modern mainstream games. Never mind it awakening the internet hate machine or it being about as useful as telling the Bioshock team they're racists for creating a game where you throw baseballs at a mixed race couple.

Those were the most popular games of the year before now and the year before that.

If you raise awareness you get more people to question these decisions and push back against the industry. It's slow, but it's a good way of making social progress in the long term and since part of the goal is to get society as a whole moving towards equality, slow but broad is better than quick but regulation-based.

Change is perfection. If my stance appears inconsistent or confusing in any way, it is because it does change rather quickly. My stance from before and after writing this post for example, were both mildly different from one another. But there it is.

[Mephansteras]

Ok, I think I see what's going on.

Part of the confusion is that I was talking about sexism in general in games and how certain sexist attitudes can pervade society to the point where people simply don't notice them because they are the norm, and not really about the Damsel in Distress issue specifically which is what you were referring to.

It's a problem with threads like this, you get multiple conversations going on and it can get a bit murky about who's where in the conversation.

The other part is that you were objecting to generalizations while making generalizations of your own, which led me to think that you were objecting to the point I was making and not the generalization itself. Which is where I got the impression that you were either trolling me or had a wildly different view of things to the point that the discussion wasn't really going to go anywhere. If I had realized that it was simply the generalization you were objecting to I'd have qualified it a bit.

So, sure, I can agree that society has progressed and that it still needs to progress further.

[chaoticag]

I still say that criticizing her video for not applying to modern games makes no sense. Older games are still part of videogames, as well as the fact that she did say the second part will cover more modern examples.

[Neonivek]

“This man has been shot. We need to get him to the hospital!”

“Hey, that’s not fair. I have this paper cut, and no one is driving me to the hospital. If we take him to the hospital, all we will be left with is this acceptable paper cut. It doesn’t hurt as much, sure, but it still an injury. I saw this other guy get a paper cut, and that made me feel sorry for him. A lot of people are treating gunshot wounds but they’re overlooking all the paper cuts.  And that’s terrible.”

Ha ha ha, ho ho ho... so funny but your wrong

An appropriate scenario is that they are both shot and because the man isn't bleeding as much the ambulence that has room for both of them, only brings the woman because the "Man is clearly in the supperior situation".

Otherwise your just being sexist except against men and that is where the importance is.

Since if you think sexism against men is anywhere close to "acceptible paper cut levels" you would be terribly wrong. It is getting better mind you, but definately not because of your statements. For example in my country it was only very recently where there were any homes for abused men because there was a very popular view that men cannot be abused (or raped) because they are seen as so "empowered" and because of that view men who claim abuse are rediculed.

THAT is why I don't consider sexism against men as acceptible... because it isn't "harmless" and it in no way diminishes sexism against women in anyway. It is understanding that to beat sexism against women it is important to beat ALL sexism.

[Fenrir]

An appropriate scenario is that they are both shot.

Sexism is a much larger problem for women than it is for men. Much larger. So no, it would not be appropriate for both persons to be shot, just as it is inappropriate to derail a conversation about women’s rights with a remark about men’s rights.

[penguinofhonor]

one of those derails that you can't recover from

[Neonivek]

Response to terrible terrible sexism inside spoiler, feel free to ignore.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

An appropriate scenario is that they are both shot.

Sexism is a much larger problem for women than it is for men. Much larger. So no, it would not be appropriate for both persons to be shot, just as it is inappropriate to derail a conversation about women’s rights with a remark about men’s rights.

Actually I responded to someone else's remark with why Sexism against men is dimished which you very offensively (as in outright sexistly) responded that "Nope sorry, sexism doesn't affect men because they are on top and thus any amount of descrimination that is put upon them is ok".

As well Sexism is no more ambiquous for men then it is for women that is important. The difference however is their ability to act outside their roles in which men have more autonomy with less (but not zero) scruitany.

As well sexism towards men actually dirrectly affects sexism towards women. Since it is the viewpoints on how men "HAVE" to behave that informs them how to treat women. It doesn't matter how much you boost women up to a grand height it media if the idea of a man is still controlling and violent.

Which proves your statement of this being an outright derail wrong because yes... Sexism against men is also about women.

Which come to think of it... is probably something that Anita should get to... Men and how they are depicted in videogames.

Since the treatment of women are often not contained in the women themselves but the men that surround them.

[Loud Whispers]

I still say that criticizing her video for not applying to modern games makes no sense. Older games are still part of videogames, as well as the fact that she did say the second part will cover more modern examples.

Except that she is saying the revival of retro-games which get translated into heavily sexist themes reinforces the resonant trope of women in games being the damsel in distress every damn damselling time, which means people need to have it pointed out to them because they are incapable of spotting it otherwise.
Bringing up the list of all the mainstream games which tore down the concept of this dehumanization still persisting today is very much relevant, though to be fare that was more in response to:
"I've worked in the industry, I've worked firsthand with developers and artists. I've known people actually making games who didn't realize that some of the stuff they did was sexist until someone pointed it out."
And it just so happens to be that most of the games that featured important female characters happened to subvert everything she talked about, like the silent protagonist being a blank canvas for males to project themselves into, or the reduction of female characters to objects to be won.

An appropriate scenario is that they are both shot.

Sexism is a much larger problem for women than it is for men. Much larger. So no, it would not be appropriate for both persons to be shot, just as it is inappropriate to derail a conversation about women’s rights with a remark about men’s rights.

Well not really, feminism is about equal rights after all. Wouldn't be that derail-y. Unless of course what was brought up was not an issue, nor at the very least an issue related to tropes in video games.

[Neonivek]

or the reduction of female characters to objects to be won

Honestly I think she is just using word play to make that sound worse then it actually is in the same way that people say parents "Brainwash their kids".

They are both true but the reality is a lot more mundane. Female characters are objects only because they are a supporting character with little affect on the story and they are "To be won" because the goal of the game is to save them.

I cannot think of many games where your goal is OUTRIGHT to win a girl except in games where she actually has thoughts, feelings, and oppinions of her own and you have to warm your way into her heart because you are already inlove with her but she isn't sure.

It is why I thought using Peach was a bit odd to me because She and Mario don't have a relationship (as I mentioned earlier) and so she is never "won" and was never a prize. Which is kinda something the counter video (that makes a lot of bad points but has a couple good ones) touches upon.

A person who is willing to risk their live to save their significant other is in a healthy relationship and isn't thinking about "I need to get my girlfriend back because otherwise I wouldn't have my girlfriend" they are thinking "Ohh no Sandra has been kidnapped, must save her because I care about her". It is why I was desperately looking at her visuals to see if she could find a game where the Damsel is refered in title like "The Princess" or "His Girlfriend" but they all called them by name.

Mind you saying that the Damsel is akin to a ball is a rather apt metaphor.

[Fenrir]

Response to terrible terrible sexism inside spoiler, feel free to ignore.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

An appropriate scenario is that they are both shot.

Sexism is a much larger problem for women than it is for men. Much larger. So no, it would not be appropriate for both persons to be shot, just as it is inappropriate to derail a conversation about women’s rights with a remark about men’s rights.

Actually I responded to someone else's remark with why Sexism against men is dimished which you very offensively (as in outright sexistly) responded that "Nope sorry, sexism doesn't affect men because they are on top and thus any amount of descrimination that is put upon them is ok".

As well Sexism is no more ambiquous for men then it is for women that is important. The difference however is their ability to act outside their roles in which men have more autonomy with less (but not zero) scruitany.

As well sexism towards men actually dirrectly affects sexism towards women. Since it is the viewpoints on how men "HAVE" to behave that informs them how to treat women. It doesn't matter how much you boost women up to a grand height it media if the idea of a man is still controlling and violent.

Which proves your statement of this being an outright derail wrong because yes... Sexism against men is also about women.

You might have made your accusations seem a little less forced. As they stand, they’re rather hard to take seriously. “...terrible terrible sexism...” “sexistly”

I don’t think you’re reading the same posts that I’m writing, or I’m not writing the posts that I think I am, so I think I’ll leave this alone.

[chaoticag]

Response to terrible terrible sexism inside spoiler, feel free to ignore.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

An appropriate scenario is that they are both shot.

Sexism is a much larger problem for women than it is for men. Much larger. So no, it would not be appropriate for both persons to be shot, just as it is inappropriate to derail a conversation about women’s rights with a remark about men’s rights.

Actually I responded to someone else's remark with why Sexism against men is dimished which you very offensively (as in outright sexistly) responded that "Nope sorry, sexism doesn't affect men because they are on top and thus any amount of descrimination that is put upon them is ok".

As well Sexism is no more ambiquous for men then it is for women that is important. The difference however is their ability to act outside their roles in which men have more autonomy with less (but not zero) scruitany.

As well sexism towards men actually dirrectly affects sexism towards women. Since it is the viewpoints on how men "HAVE" to behave that informs them how to treat women. It doesn't matter how much you boost women up to a grand height it media if the idea of a man is still controlling and violent.

Which proves your statement of this being an outright derail wrong because yes... Sexism against men is also about women.

Which come to think of it... is probably something that Anita should get to... Men and how they are depicted in videogames.

Since the treatment of women are often not contained in the women themselves but the men that surround them.

Half right, while the treatment of men is a feminist concern, and how men are treated, women still do get the receiving end of the stick more often. To bring up recent news, abortion in North Dakota cannot be performed after 6 weeks of pregnancy, regardless of genetic defects or life risking issues, and Kansas is pushing for a bill that defines personhood at conception, which means if a women has a miscarage, she can be charged with child neglect. Yes, some men will be affected by this law, but by an large, it doesn't mean the effect will happen on a one to one ratio.

Now this in specific:

Which come to think of it... is probably something that Anita should get to... Men and how they are depicted in videogames.

While an interesting topic, this is prolly something better suited for male feminists. Society does not put pressure on her to conform to male stereotypes, unlike the male players.

I still say that criticizing her video for not applying to modern games makes no sense. Older games are still part of videogames, as well as the fact that she did say the second part will cover more modern examples.

Except that she is saying the revival of retro-games which get translated into heavily sexist themes reinforces the resonant trope of women in games being the damsel in distress every damn damselling time, which means people need to have it pointed out to them because they are incapable of spotting it otherwise.
Bringing up the list of all the mainstream games which tore down the concept of this dehumanization still persisting today is very much relevant, though to be fare that was more in response to:
"I've worked in the industry, I've worked firsthand with developers and artists. I've known people actually making games who didn't realize that some of the stuff they did was sexist until someone pointed it out."
And it just so happens to be that most of the games that featured important female characters happened to subvert everything she talked about, like the silent protagonist being a blank canvas for males to project themselves into, or the reduction of female characters to objects to be won.

Right, but you're still using this video as a base, and no, not everything in modern gaming is a utopia of non-sexism and sexist subversions ever. Duke Nukem 4ever came out in 2012 in case you forgot, and it veers into outright misogyny. Not to mention objectification doesn't stop when a women speaks, it's still very possible to have her treated as an object even if she has a speaking part. Halo 3 had Cortana to be saved. Regardless of whether or not it was a retelling of Orpheus, Cortana was essentially turned into an object to be saved. I can prolly drag up more examples, but the point I want to get to here is yes, it still happens, but might be more nuanced, and she hasn't talked about modern games yet because they build on retro games. We can't criticise her for not speaking about modern games in her first video if her second video is meant for that.

[Neonivek]

While an interesting topic, this is prolly something better suited for male feminists. Society does not put pressure on her to conform to male stereotypes, unlike the male players

Most "Male feminists" call them selves something else but not that (For example: Egalitarian)

I mean how men are depicted in terms of how they should act towards women and things in general.

A lot of these are about how women themselves are depicted and how the story uses them. Yet it barely deals with how the male characters treat them when they actually do get to interact with them.

I mean the female Damsel tends to even get more lines even if it is just "Help!" Yet on a society level we also have to look at how games think we should treat them as well. Thus a look into the men and how they treat women becomes important.

Mind you I'd bet money that Anita will chose Duke Nukem as her "prime example" but its Anita (Mind you a lot of people have said that duke Nukem makes them feel dirty)

 

Yes, some men will be affected by this law, but by an large, it doesn't mean the effect will happen on a one to one ratio.

Ohh yeah of course not. It is very unbalanced, but to say it is so unbalanced that sexism only realistically affects women is a very harmful attitude to both men and women. Which is why I make it a point to be offended whenever anyone suggests that sexism towards males is either non-existant or "not a big deal".

What was offensive about the scenario done as a criticism of my point is that it suggest that sexism towards males is such a "non-issue" that it deserves not even looking into. it is "Just a scratch" so to speak. When in reality both patients need help, certainly the woman needs to be put on life support but the man definately needs to get to the hospital.

[Putnam]

Have you ever felt that your role in society is limited because of the fact that you are male?

[Neonivek]

Have you ever felt that your role in society is limited because of the fact that you are male?

Yes.

I don't know why you expect me to say no? Everyone is put into that situation. Many a book, movie, and videogame is about breaking out of your perscribed role. Whether it be by race, class, or gender.

[Putnam]

And why was that?