Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 114 115 [116] 117 118 ... 277

Author Topic: Re: Only two posts on 'Tropes vs Women in Video Games'  (Read 309390 times)

Rolan7

  • Bay Watcher
  • [GUE'VESA][BONECARN]
    • View Profile
Re: Only two posts on 'Tropes vs Women in Video Games'
« Reply #1725 on: June 04, 2013, 01:21:40 pm »

  • Have only misstated the points that make you mad.
Everything I've argued against, I've quoted.  Most of this last reply consists of you paraphrasing events as you see them.
This is some Mafia-level crap, and I'm not going to continue distracting from that actual, interesting, arguments in this this thread.  I'm honestly sorry.
Logged
She/they
No justice: no peace.
Quote from: Fallen London, one Unthinkable Hope
This one didn't want to be who they was. On the Surface – it was a dull, unconsidered sadness. But everything changed. Which implied everything could change.

Neonivek

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Only two posts on 'Tropes vs Women in Video Games'
« Reply #1726 on: June 04, 2013, 01:31:25 pm »

If Anita only wanted to say "It exists" then she wouldn't come up with "exemplars" of her trope or explain why it is a problem... She is bad at examples.

It is always where her videos are weakest.
Logged

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH
Re: Only two posts on 'Tropes vs Women in Video Games'
« Reply #1727 on: June 04, 2013, 01:37:14 pm »

I talked about how Anita has given interviews where she has created this image of a 'gaming culture' and called it misogynistic and evidence for a large sexist society, using trolls on the internet to represent them.
You started saying she didn't say all gamers are trolls, nor halo players trolls, then you said I was making bullshit implications. Of course, you were right in the former, and that's because that wasn't the point I was making.
Then you started going on about how 'Have they sent YOU rape threats and made face-smashing flash games of YOUR image?' [sic].
Then you conflated it with terrorism.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Then you said my point about how you should 'Go buy the games that interest you,' was irrelevant without justifying why supporting the game studios that do what you say is irrelevant.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Then you said my question about why video game designers should not have free reign over their game designs was irrelevant without justifying why.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Then you made an oversimplistic view on male characters which is also wrong, and used that to justify your point that women and men are absolutely incapable of recognizing attractive features.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Then you said you could argue 'my position,' whatever that is, better than I, despite providing no argument. Then I provided my argument, and you refuted nothing.
Your position could be completely true and your contribution would still be completely irrelevant!  I could argue your position so much better!  Maybe you keep seeing the same arguments because you're completely incapable of refuting them!

Argue away:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

You've already shown you only share interest in ensuring you're discussing with people who agree with you. Before you tell more people to get out of the thread, consider that you may be more suited to regurgitating your drivel into a hugbox.

Rolan7

  • Bay Watcher
  • [GUE'VESA][BONECARN]
    • View Profile
Re: Only two posts on 'Tropes vs Women in Video Games'
« Reply #1728 on: June 04, 2013, 02:08:53 pm »

You've already shown you only share interest in ensuring you're discussing with people who agree with you. Before you tell more people to get out of the thread, consider that you may be more suited to regurgitating your drivel into a hugbox.

But I haven't address any of the Anita-supporters in this thread for days, if ever.  I've written pages countering your inane accusations and implications masquerading as arguments, and then a single message intended at Max White and Neonivek.

So... once again you're making an incorrect, inflammatory claim.  Please stop?

If Anita only wanted to say "It exists" then she wouldn't come up with "exemplars" of her trope or explain why it is a problem... She is bad at examples.

It is always where her videos are weakest.

Right, she's trying to show that the tropes are widespread by showing lots of examples.  It's why she briefly analyzes lots of games rather than trying to prove any single game harmful.
Logged
She/they
No justice: no peace.
Quote from: Fallen London, one Unthinkable Hope
This one didn't want to be who they was. On the Surface – it was a dull, unconsidered sadness. But everything changed. Which implied everything could change.

Neonivek

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Only two posts on 'Tropes vs Women in Video Games'
« Reply #1729 on: June 04, 2013, 02:10:38 pm »

Quote
Right, she's trying to show that the tropes are widespread by showing lots of examples.  It's why she briefly analyzes lots of games rather than trying to prove any single game harmful.

But she does stop and analyses single games.
Logged

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH
Re: Only two posts on 'Tropes vs Women in Video Games'
« Reply #1730 on: June 04, 2013, 03:32:27 pm »

But I haven't address any of the Anita-supporters in this thread for days, if ever.
You shouldn't divide people onto sides, that's something I've not seen anyone do in this thread until now.

  I've written pages countering your inane accusations
-All of which are true.

-and implications masquerading as arguments
It is not my fault if in your comprehensive reading skills you see ghosts where there are none.

So... once again you're making an incorrect, inflammatory claim.  Please stop?
I made a list of claims. You said I was bullshitting it, and still say I am incorrect. I showed where you did everything I claimed. You made your accusations against me, and you still have yet to prove anything. You have still yet to prove where you addressed any part of my argument. You still continue to insist I begone or be quiet.

If Anita only wanted to say "It exists" then she wouldn't come up with "exemplars" of her trope or explain why it is a problem... She is bad at examples.

It is always where her videos are weakest.
Right, she's trying to show that the tropes are widespread by showing lots of examples.  It's why she briefly analyzes lots of games rather than trying to prove any single game harmful.
She proves better the uselessness of defining stories by their tropes, listing image after image of female characters begging for quick death, ignoring all context. It is much in the same way people who argue that violent video games cause violence will take scenes like people being sawn in half like a baguette with a hat or having their limbs rent apart in a slideshow of gore out of context, so as to make it appear as simple senseless violence.
She could have taken one or two games where everything negative she described was actually present, and actually actively spreading a message to inflict grievous harm on women. Then she could have taken a few good examples of games she likes and feels should be encouraged to grow, described why they are a positive boon for all, and ended with a list of suggestions which she feels would improve and aid game designers in producing quality stories and characters.
But no, it would be much easier to go the route of emotions, and generate 'controversy' from the likes of tumblr and /v/, earning a hefty dollar.

Neonivek

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Only two posts on 'Tropes vs Women in Video Games'
« Reply #1731 on: June 04, 2013, 03:44:53 pm »

As well a reason the examples need to give the idea of why something is a problem is because just being widespread is not an issue in it of itself.
Logged

GlyphGryph

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Only two posts on 'Tropes vs Women in Video Games'
« Reply #1732 on: June 04, 2013, 03:46:08 pm »

What are you afraid of, LW? What nerve did she strike that makes this issue so personal to you, that you're willing to bypass reasonable argument and discourse in favour of rhetorical tricks and bald assertion?

You've said nothing of substance except that you don't like her, and don't like what she's doing, and what she SHOULD be doing because you are oh-so-concerned, but that's bullshit concern trolling and you know it, and everyone who's reading knows it, and a bunch of apologist for the internet asshats that have been attacking her. It's pathetic, and worse, it's hopefully confusing.

There's been plenty of legitimate criticism. Neonivek's arguments are about par for the course for him, but it's obvious he's coming from the usual place. But you? You make so many posts, with no substance, revealing nothing, and it's frustrating even to read them.

So let me make this simple:
What is your angle? What do you actually want, and what are you actually trying to accomplish in this thread? Why does she have you so damned upset?
Logged

Neonivek

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Only two posts on 'Tropes vs Women in Video Games'
« Reply #1733 on: June 04, 2013, 03:55:04 pm »

Quote
Neonivek's arguments are about par for the course for him, but it's obvious he's coming from the usual place.


I have no idea if I should be like  ;) or like  >:( or like  ::)
Logged

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH
Re: Only two posts on 'Tropes vs Women in Video Games'
« Reply #1734 on: June 04, 2013, 04:28:09 pm »

What are you afraid of, LW?
Those dastardly strong independent women of course.

What nerve did she strike that makes this issue so personal to you, that you're willing to bypass reasonable argument and discourse in favour of rhetorical tricks and bald assertion?
Why nothing of course. I do take personal interest in the latter accusation, partly because I have a particular dislike for rhetoric, and that is one of the criticisms I have made. And I have made my arguments, rather reasonably I should hope so too. It wasn't exactly hidden, I have reposted it countless times already. The problem arises in that Rolan has consistently taken my criticisms and professed them to be my arguments, poorly I might add so too, whilst ignoring my argument altogether. Or the other issue in which apparently our arguments' worth are also dependent on said quantity of threats.

You've said nothing of substance except that you don't like her, and don't like what she's doing, and what she SHOULD be doing because you are oh-so-concerned, but that's bullshit concern trolling and you know it, and everyone who's reading knows it, and a bunch of apologist for the internet asshats that have been attacking her. It's pathetic, and worse, it's hopefully confusing.
I have not defended the arsehats, I have criticized those who say the arsehats represent Anita's criticism. It's a rather cheap way of trying to win an argument by lumping the opposition into the side of those sending rape and death threats, apparently all in caps locks.

There's been plenty of legitimate criticism. Neonivek's arguments are about par for the course for him, but it's obvious he's coming from the usual place. But you? You make so many posts, with no substance, revealing nothing, and it's frustrating even to read them.
That would be because the last 10 posts or so would be criticism.

So let me make this simple:
What is your angle? What do you actually want, and what are you actually trying to accomplish in this thread? Why does she have you so damned upset?
Well I wouldn't say I'm upset, that's not how I wrote this. Obviously it cannot be read in the same way I wrote it though, so I defer my judgements to you and let the words talk for me.
What I want would be for people to be able to come to the best understanding, myself included, of what are problems to games and what cause them. What I am trying to accomplish, is free civil discussion without people compelling others to be silent, or elsewise deliberately obfuscating legitimate criticisms.
And really, if you're going to claim you can make a better argument, why don't you? Why reject an opportunity of absolute education?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

That is the argument I have settled with. It's the one I've put most research into, and this is after listening to the best arguments both in this thread and out. I can honestly say it's certainly more right than the argument I first came into this thread with, and I am rather disappointed that this has been ignored in favour of focusing on accusations of strawman accusations of trolling.

Putnam

  • Bay Watcher
  • DAT WIZARD
    • View Profile
Re: Only two posts on 'Tropes vs Women in Video Games'
« Reply #1735 on: June 04, 2013, 04:32:29 pm »

A dislike for rhetoric gets nobody anywhere. Rhetoric is the language used to convince another person of something. Disliking rhetoric is disliking proper discourse.

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH
Re: Only two posts on 'Tropes vs Women in Video Games'
« Reply #1736 on: June 04, 2013, 04:34:11 pm »

A dislike for rhetoric gets nobody anywhere. Rhetoric is the language used to convince another person of something. Disliking rhetoric is disliking proper discourse.
So be it. Language is not about persuading people to your cause, it is about expressing your thoughts. It is entirely possible to do so and have a more fruitful discussion than a pointless argument with pages of Latin plastered into the seams of every sentence.

*EDIT
Fixed typo.

Putnam

  • Bay Watcher
  • DAT WIZARD
    • View Profile
Re: Only two posts on 'Tropes vs Women in Video Games'
« Reply #1737 on: June 04, 2013, 04:36:02 pm »

Expression of thoughts includes persuasion. In fact, rhetoric is required to make one's position clear in a way that makes it seem logical.

penguinofhonor

  • Bay Watcher
  • Minister of Love
    • View Profile
Re: Re: Only two posts on 'Tropes vs Women in Video Games'
« Reply #1738 on: June 04, 2013, 04:38:21 pm »

Rhetoric has two definitions. I think each of you are using a different one.

Quote from: wiktionary
1. The art of using language, especially public speaking, as a means to persuade.
2. Meaningless language with an exaggerated style intended to impress.
Logged

Loud Whispers

  • Bay Watcher
  • They said we have to aim higher, so we dug deeper.
    • View Profile
    • I APPLAUD YOU SIRRAH
Re: Only two posts on 'Tropes vs Women in Video Games'
« Reply #1739 on: June 04, 2013, 04:40:06 pm »

Expression of thoughts includes persuasion. In fact, rhetoric is required to make one's position clear in a way that makes it seem logical.
Rhetoric is an art; yet it is not a requirement of language nor philosophy, the latter of course being entirely composed of both logic and rationality.
Pages: 1 ... 114 115 [116] 117 118 ... 277