Print

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

[Max White]

evolutionary psychology

makes no scientific sense whatsoever

Unless there's been recent changes in the field that turned it into something besides unmitigated just-so bullshit, anyway Which, hey, maybe. It's been a couple years. State of the study was so mindbogglingly terrible last time I looked into it I haven't bothered checking in occasionally. Pretty stories, no science. But if that link is representative...

Hold on I have been skimming parts of the thread. I need to give this a reread anyway, but still...
Frumple, are you saying to say there isn't good scientific ground supporting evolution?

[GlyphGryph]

Evo-Psych, the psuedo-science field, not evolution, the scientific theory.

Related, but not the same, much like Artificial Selection and Guided Breeding is a real thing that happens, but that doesn't mean Intelligent Design is a valid scientific field.

[Frumple]

Frumple, are you saying to say there isn't good scientific ground supporting evolution?

Nah. Early evolutionary studies had some pretty big issues, though, sure. Those have been fixed, insofar as I'm aware.

[Neonivek]

I just saw the front page of Anita's new video, with a warning "This video contains a handful of graphic scenes involving violence against women. Parents should preview the video first before sharing with young children." Rampant violence against men, that's all well and good and needs no warning.

At this point I may have to put up something I rarely practice myself but that is important. (I usually don't because it is a lot of work)

Sometimes most of what someone says is wrong or not worth looking at, but it doesn't mean they don't make point.

Anita hints at good points but never follows them up mostly because she is terrible at giving examples (especially if you played the games).

Basically you have to overlook a lot to enjoy her videos but once you clear away the poor examples, unsupported arguments, and works used only for impact but not sense... You end up with a very light video in terms of actual information.

You have no idea how much I want her to support some of her statements, because I feel like she has reasoning behind it but I never get to hear it. I am just supposed to assume she is right, which would be fine if this wasn't professional work.

[Loud Whispers]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

If you think we're using bad arguments, point out the bad arguments.  Don't copy what you think are bad arguments and then wait to claim parody when we call you out.  That isn't a valid argument.
Also you weren't even replying to me in what I quoted... Lumping us all together, huh?

Ok. You said video game consumers are more sexist than people admit. Then you used trolls to justify that statement, and said her criticism was death threats, using trolls to justify this. I brought up the amount of people Halo was sold to because it shows just how many people play games, you somehow believed it to be an attack on Halo.

Fine, the first part was an appeal to emotion.  The second part is still valid and here's evidence:
http://www.youtube.com/user/OfficialNerdCubed A popular channel with a host who does video game LPs and live-action skits.  775,468 subscribers.  Has no punch-in-the-face game, public rape or death threats, or even much ill will at all.

This is not an internet personality.

http://www.youtube.com/user/feministfrequency  A woman claiming that sexism is a problem in the games industry.  88,614 subscribers.  http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/598591 (was taken down, but you can see pictures)

So clearly your assertion is wrong.  Not all internet personalities suffer this harassment.  Even ones much more successful are not targeted, as long as they aren't offensive to certain hateful groups.

180,000 subscribers. Has had death threats, rape threats, people send him letters listing his family members at his work place, people deliberately call out his real name to show they know who he is, people post all of his details calling for 'the problem to be sorted,' people photoshop his face onto pornstars and spread it onto porn sites e.t.c.

No, I... what?
I was saying there are thousands of internet personas more popular than Anita who don't face this level of harassment.  Was that actually unclear to you?

An internet persona is not an internet personality.

Death threats, rape threats, and graphical depictions of assault on a person's image are attempts to instill terror.

And it's not terrorism.

Okay, so you mentioned that game for no reason whatsoever?
You can't just imply stuff and not get called on it.  You provided a shitty example for an argument you didn't make.

No, I provided an example of a game doing what you just described as being good,  said 'go support the games that do you what you describe as good.' Then you started arguing with an arguement that wasn't there, then when I said the exact same thing again you continued arguing and repeat, repeat, repeat...

I think you're moving the goalposts.  You asked why there should be video games that aren't smut.  Your question is irrelevant.

No, I asked why the hell video game characters can't be whatever the designers want them to be.

This is a hard thing to demonstrate, as we're talking about trends in a very large amount of video games.

No, it's very easy to demonstrate with a few well detailed examples. You don't need many thousands of out of context appeals to emotion, only one or two fleshed out examples.

I actually love the Halo series and storyline, it's just that Master Chief is an example of a tough male hero who bottles up his emotions.  In fact I love it because Master Chief is a badass, a male fantasy.  It caters to me.

You are what's killing the game industry.

No, you did not already convince everybody that women and men have the same idea of male attractiveness.  I don't think you convinced anybody.

-Game covers designed by men, published and illustrated by men-

+Identical to romance novel covers designed by women, published and illustrated by women+

No... neither gender is wrong.  They just find different male qualities attractive.  To grossly generalize, women are attracted to sensitive men while men consider tough, muscular men attractive.  Men are generally thought to be more visual.  Again, generalizations, but it matches what we see in male-targeted and female-targeted entertainment.

When looking for a mate women choose the most healthy, burly looking guy they can. When looking for a partner, they look for the sensitive child rearing type. This all fits into the notion that both sexes identify sexiness incredibly easily.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

First of all, the point I was making in that quote was that romance novels and video games are not equivalent because one is mostly smut and one is mostly not.  I don't even know where you're getting "also you" from.  Secondly, well...

The examples I gave were covers for romance novels:
 [count noun] a book or film dealing with love in a sentimental or idealized way:
You're calling them smut:
3 [mass noun] obscene or lascivious talk, writing, or pictures.
Which all makes it a matter of view, so do continue on explaining why romance novels or indeed, video games cannot have the freedom to do whatever they wish with their characters.

Let me google that for you.

"The term describes an aesthetic that can be found in disparate areas in East Asia: a young man whose beauty (and sexual appeal) transcends the boundary of gender or sexual orientation."

[spoiler=To be explicit]Since I know someone's going to find a way to misinterpret this, I'll be explicit.  You are saying that men and women have the same idea of what is attractive for each gender. I am saying, and have been for a while, that this is bullshit.  Bishonen, your own example from this very thread, are a perfect example of this.

There are exceptions, the above is the rule. Bishonen "transcend the bonudary of gender or sexual orientation." Same reasons for girly boys and manly girls existing.

  Women find that sexy.  Men do not find that sexy or even realize without being told that women are into that sort of thing.

You just said that about Bishonen.

...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  The reason is that they assume sexy = manly, and are just generally out of touch with what women like.

A lot of problems I think could be fixed if men didn't project their decency onto women and women didn't project their brutishness onto men.

While I'm irrationally happy that you made that mistake, I am in a fact a man.

[Who you are shouldn't factor into your argument, whenever].

So Rolan, you actually going to give an opposition about my points or are you just going to continue saying men are brutes and Anita gets rape threats means I'm wrong?

[Max White]

Anita hints at good points but never follows them up mostly because she is terrible at giving examples (especially if you played the games).

She isn't bad at examples, heck I would say she has a talent for it! She is bad at social diagnostics.
She knows there is a problem, and the problem is affecting women, and has so far assumed it is the existence of certain tropes that put women in a certain role. This is a mistake, the problem is the lack of diversity in roles.

She is basically a second wave feminist in lipstick.

EDIT: No, I take it back.
What I should have said is "The problem is affecting people", because I feel guys are missing out on interesting games and trivialized as meatheads who only want bigger boobies. I apologize.

[Loud Whispers]

She isn't bad at examples, heck I would say she has a talent for it!

No she is bad at examples. She rips everything painfully out of context and uses games where the protagonist kills themself as a good way of dealing with loss. It literally appears as if she only ever heard of the games she uses through someone else's reviews. In her two months she could have picked one or two games and covered them in detail, doing so much more than 'look at all these violent scenes.'

[palsch]

She isn't bad at examples, heck I would say she has a talent for it! She is bad at social diagnostics.
She knows there is a problem, and the problem is affecting women, and has so far assumed it is the existence of certain tropes that put women in a certain role. This is a mistake, the problem is the lack of diversity in roles.

I'm sorry, maybe I missed something, but where did she say that the problem affecting women is caused by or limited to the tropes?

Again, she is making a series highlighting sexist tropes in video games as a way to increase awareness of these tropes. I don't see anywhere claims that this is what is most important or that there aren't other problems to be addressed. This sort of increased awareness - and especially giving people the shared vocabulary to talk about these things, which tropes are fantastic for - is very valuable. It gives people the tools to identify things that bother them in games and criticise them in a way that others can understand, even if they disagree or don't have the perspective to usually see the problems.

No she is bad at examples. She rips everything painfully out of context and uses games where the protagonist kills themself as a good way of dealing with loss. It literally appears as if she only ever heard of the games she uses through someone else's reviews. In her two months she could have picked one or two games and covered them in detail, doing so much more than 'look at all these violent scenes.'

Again, she is making a list of games that use a given trope. Just because the game does things in addition to that trope doesn't mean it doesn't use that trope. I really don't see how this is so hard to get.

[Max White]

Sexist tropes? What makes them sexist?

[Loud Whispers]

Sexist tropes? What makes them sexist?

She said they are so they are now.

[palsch]

Sexist tropes? What makes them sexist?

Their use.

Once again again, tropes do not exist in a vacuum. They are their use in various media and the interactions between the stories and society. You can't divorce them from that.

When it comes to the tropes she is talking about - Damsel in Distress, Women in Refrigerators, Euthanized Damsel, etc. - the very fact that they are so common and accepted as valid plot points and roles for female characters is what makes them sexist. That having a woman kidnapped or killed to serve as motivation for the male protagonist is pretty much the default video game plot is sexist. That - as shown in the latest video - games can commonly invite and justify violence against video while playing up common pro-domestic violence narratives is sexist and dangerous.

Now is it possible to use plot points that are part of the tropes without it being sexist? Maybe, although it would be hard given the social context you are working in. The whole parody cake thing comes up for one thing. Unless you are actually subverting the trope you are effectively re-enforcing the social impression of the narrative. And subversion tends to require a deeper understanding of the trope and it's problematic elements than a lot of video game developers have been demonstrating.

[Max White]

So... What you are saying... Is the problem exists not with the tropes themselves... But instead their over saturation in a given medium...

SO EXACTLY WHAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING AND ANITA DOESN'T UNDERSTAND. Well thank you.
I shouldn't even have to repeat this, I have in the past so many times, but I know even this won't be the last time. There is nothing wrong with these tropes*, but rather something wrong with the dependents on these tropes. We should be able to make a game where the hero saves the princess and not call it out as being sexist. In the same way, we should be able to play a variety of games where women are given roles other than the girl who needs saving.

*Possible exception to Women asking for violence, but that isn't wrong because it is objectification or any reason that the other given tropes are wrong.

[palsch]

So... What you are saying... Is the problem exists not with the tropes themselves... But instead their over saturation in a given medium...

SO EXACTLY WHAT I HAVE BEEN SAYING AND ANITA DOESN'T UNDERSTAND. Well thank you.

No. I didn't say the problem isn't with the tropes themselves. I said that the social context and abundance is part of the tropes. There is a substantial difference.

The tropes are problematic for the social context of their content. You can't separate the two. That's kinda the point of them being, well, tropes. That they are elements of stories that have a broader social context in the wider world of media and narratives.



EDIT: Just to be clear, Anita makes the same points. From the first video;

The pattern of presenting women as fundamentally weak, ineffective or entirely incapable also has larger ramifications beyond the characters themselves and the specific games they inhabit. We have to remember that these games do not exist in a vacuum, they are an increasingly important and influential part of our larger social and cultural ecosystem.

The reality is that this troupe is being used in a real-world context where backwards sexist attitudes are already rampant. It’s a sad fact that a large percentage of the world’s population still clings to the deeply sexist belief that women as a group need to be sheltered, protected and taken care of by men.

The belief that women are somehow a “naturally weaker gender” is a deeply ingrained socially constructed myth, which of course is completely false- but the notion is reinforced and perpetuated when women are continuously portrayed as frail, fragile, and vulnerable creatures.

Just to be clear, I am not saying that all games using the damsel in distress as a plot device are automatically sexist or have no value. But it’s undeniable that popular culture is a powerful influence in or lives and the Damsel in Distress trope as a recurring trend does help to normalize extremely toxic, patronizing and paternalistic attitudes about women.

[Max White]

There is a sexist social expectation that women must wear skirts, despite the fact that pants are both more comfortable and practical. This is unfair because it is disadvantaging women just to appeal to what men want to see women wear.
/rational point
Therefor when ever a women wears a skirts is a sexist trope! Women shouldn't be wearing skirts! Look at all these photos I have of women wearing skirts! You can't escape the fact that fashion does not exist in a vacuum and it is sexist in a broader social context!


That is literally the kind of argument you are making right now. You do understand that, right?

[AlleeCat]

There is a sexist social expectation that women must wear skirts, despite the fact that pants are both more comfortable and practical. This is unfair because it is disadvantaging women just to appeal to what men want to see women wear.
/rational point
Therefor when ever a women wears a skirts is a sexist trope! Women shouldn't be wearing skirts! Look at all these photos I have of women wearing skirts! You can't escape the fact that fashion does not exist in a vacuum and it is sexist in a broader social context!


That is literally the kind of argument you are making right now. You do understand that, right?

I, for one, would love to wear skirts if I had the legs for them. Just sayan...