Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Ouze wrote:

 Monster Rain wrote:
The litanies of hate from the internet vary from when the target is male or female.

You should start a debate with Monster Rain from earlier in the thread. He was saying the exact opposite of you, specifically, "people pretend that the person in the video in the OP was singled out in some unique manner for abuse on the internet based on her sex. " Pretty funny, huh?.

For someone who is mad about strawmen... wow. Context. Live it; love it.

 Ouze wrote:
[

 Monster Rain wrote:
You seem to think that rape is the worst thing to threaten someone with, when there are public figures that deal with death threats on a daily basis.

I didn't actually say that (but have fun whaling on that strawman!). I think death threats are worse, which of course she also got in plentiful supply. Let me try and recap where we are here; Monster Rain #1 pointed out that women don't get harassed in a unique manner. I pointed out that was not really true, and then Monster Rain #2 kind of made my argument for me. I'm not really sure what your argument is anymore, since we have kind of a Schrodinger's Cat kind of situation now, .

You brought up rape threats as though it were some sort of trump card, brohemoth. I was letting you know that there are worse things to be threatened with as a public figure regardless of gender or sex.

You're either deliberately misinterpreting what I've said, or just way too close to this to think clearly. It's entirely possible that abuse didn't originate due to Sarkeesian's gender, but the form it took did. Keeping up?

 Ouze wrote:
[

 Monster Rain wrote:
You seem really emotional about this

Well, after reading your post, I am feeling an emotion, but it's mostly derision.

Oh you. I genuinely like angry Ouze. Best heel turn ever. But like I said, this isn't going anywhere productive. I'll unsubscribe, and you can feel free to have the last word. Tell me I'm ragequitting or something classy like that.

 Amaya wrote:

 Monster Rain wrote:


The content of the net hate was such as it was because she happened to be female, not because of it. .

I think I understand what you're trying to say here, but you really failed at making a coherent point.

I'm assuming you meant that she received certain insults because she is female. She was not simply insulted because of her gender.

Well, you understood it. But then again you are rather more level-headed than some.

I have to say, with the "best heel turn ever" line, I laughed.

Now it's all broken between us, we're going to have to have the kids deliver messages for each other, and then we won't even look at each other during.

Why did you have to come between us, Anita Sarkeesian!

pic not related

Good job on ruining the thread guys.

 Lynata wrote:
I'm not sure if this is a matter of skewed perception or scepticism on your part, but she did not "publish the worst", she published an unedited random screenshot to showcase the amount and nature of abuse directed at her.
I also thought that this would be the framework you were referring to, but I guess I misunderstood.

And judging from the screenshot, her detractors pretty much framed themselves.

Skewed perception? Care to elaborate on this?

 Lynata wrote:
I would presume she chose youtube because it is the single-most popular video hosting site on the 'web, and thus the best way to reach maximum audience. Since it is informing/presenting that is her goal, this obviously takes precedence.

I think you're just trying to find something, anything to criticise because deep down you don't agree with the message. Why not discuss the message, then?

So my perception is skewed, or I'm cynical and deep down you claim I don't agree with her message. Next you'll be telling me that its because of some childhood trauma, or that it relates to my mother
What message has she given so far? She is one video into her current series that is outlining her argument. As I said on Page 1 I was reserving judgement on her message until later in the series. That does not prohibit me from comment on her conduct up to this point. That includes stirring up hostile reaction for financial advantage, and posting her work for public dissemination and frustrating any critical examination of it. As I said before it comes across as academically dishonest, as well as insulting to those who backed her kickstarter.

 Lynata wrote:
As for why she gets more abuse than others, personally I would suspect this has to do with her popularity. Other messages like hers just are not as well known, and thus less visited by those people who would leave negative comments.

Or is it because she and/or her supporters decided to spam up a renowned cesspit on the internet to provoke a reaction.

 Lynata wrote:
I think you're seeing more than there is to it - apparently interpreting criticism on male supremacy as an attack on all males.

That is not the case. Please do not subscribe arguments or motivations to me, especially when there is nothing to support your claims. I have pointed out some flaws in her arguments and the way they are presented to her audience

 Lynata wrote:
Indeed. If society truly wants equality, it should actually be rather easy to fight sexism simply because one only needs to point out differences and trends. Kind of like that video.
What I was referring to was more referring to how some people won't acknowledge the differences as being wrong or where they originate from, even where they are obvious to exist.

I can appreciate that approach much more than being based on a feeling.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ouze wrote:
When my wife and I eat out, we usually pay depending on who's got more free cash at the time

My wife and I share a bank account so it really doesn't matter who pays

Oh Ouze, I can't stay mad at you.

Anita Sarkeesian's video and the subsequent mild crankiness, and delightfully histrionic hullabaloo from Dakka's usual suspect, will be in the misty past. But our love will spring eternal.

Get a room you two.

 Monster Rain wrote:
But our love will spring eternal.

I told myself I wasn't going to cry...

So, when is part two of this series due? Or is there no ETA? I know this part, the one that was released, was delayed some apparently.

Also, how many parts total?

 Ouze wrote:
So, when is part two of this series due? Or is there no ETA? I know this part, the one that was released, was delayed some apparently.

Also, how many parts total?

Maybe because she raised 26 times the cash its now going to be 26 times as long

 Ouze wrote:
So, when is part two of this series due? Or is there no ETA? I know this part, the one that was released, was delayed some apparently.

Also, how many parts total?

Quite a few, as there will be topics covered beyond 'Damsels In Distress', and this may be more than two parts as well. Probably have to be a Kickstarter backer to know as that is where updates are posted as far as I know.

A funny thing I read on steam forums:

Majority of zombies in games are male.

 illuknisaa wrote:
A funny thing I read on steam forums:

Majority of zombies in games are male.

Now is that an acceptable gender imbalance so show mainly dead men, or would increasing the number of female zombies further the argument that they are objects with no freewill being acted upon by a male protagonist, or that it de-sensitizes us towards violence against women, or that we are now sexualising the dead on account of their torn clothing?

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 illuknisaa wrote:
A funny thing I read on steam forums:

Majority of zombies in games are male.

Now is that an acceptable gender imbalance so show mainly dead men, or would increasing the number of female zombies further the argument that they are objects with no freewill being acted upon by a male protagonist, or that it de-sensitizes us towards violence against women, or that we are now sexualising the dead on account of their torn clothing?

All of the above.

I agree with what she said but... she didn't really say anything we didn't know about already. People gave her 100,000 dollars and a summary is what we got?

If she didn't want to see the sea of troll comments (cause feminists tend to get them), then she should've at least left the ratings bar on.

After seeing her video on Bayonetta, I've lost some hope that she'll put out something that isn't just feminist propaganda.

 TheCustomLime wrote:

After seeing her video on Bayonetta, I've lost some hope that she'll put out something that isn't just feminist propaganda.

I hate making this point, because I shouldn't have to. Feminism is not a dirty word. It simply means the ideal that men and women are given the same rights and social status.

Her Bayonetta video was awful, and her fist video for TvsW may have been somewhat underwhelming in what it covered, but that's not the point. Sarkeesian may raise a few decent points, and a fair few poor ones, the important part of this entire controversy has nothing to do with her arguments, but by her awful treatment by the videogame playing community. Because of such childish behaviour, her vindication reaches far beyond her arguments or her videos. The videogame community's obscene clamoring to shut her down only proved the need for someone like her to spur on conversation on the subject. I don't agree with everything she says, and some of her arguments may be silly, but I have to applaud her simply for acting as a platform to start discussion on a subject that needs to be discussed.

Mhm, the main problem with the word feminist is that for most people it's seen as what's actually misandrist.

 Fafnir wrote:
but by her awful treatment by the videogame playing community

The video gaming community, or 4chan?

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Fafnir wrote:
but by her awful treatment by the videogame playing community

The video gaming community, or 4chan?

Or Lego Fans, TV fans, Hunger Games fans the list goes on (most of her videos have nothing to do with video games). Even setting aside my conspiracy theory that she orchestrated that entire series of events for financial gain, there's no real reason to believe that the backlash was solely from one source. She did for most of that videos run leave it unmoderated, the first time she's ever done that (all her other videos have comment moderation on) so we have no basis on which to assume that the hate is only about the subject of women in video games. And one way or another, links to it were spammed across 4chan which pretty much guaranteed a crap storm would follow.

And honestly if you want to complain about feminism being a treated like a dirty word, blame her. People like her are the reason why it gets just a negative context around it.

People gave her 100,000 dollars and a summary is what we got?

I did say earlier in the thread that, for something she was given a lot of money to do, Damsel in Distress may not have been the best trope to kick everything off with. There are better ones she could have done, like the root of nearly all the tropes I suspect she's likely to cover: Women are Delicate Would have been a much better way to set the stage. But then I never credited her with being good at what she's doing so *shrugs*

 LordofHats wrote:
Or Lego Fans, TV fans, Hunger Games fans the list goes on (most of her videos have nothing to do with video games) Even setting aside my conspiracy theory that she orchestrated that entire series of events for financial gain, there's no real reason to believe that the backlash was solely from one source. She did for most of that videos run leave it unmoderated, the first time she's ever done that (all her other videos have comment moderation on) so we have no basis on which to assume that the hate is only about the subject of women in video games. And one way or another, links to it were spammed across 4chan which pretty much guaranteed a crap storm would follow..

Its a conspiracy theory that we share then. I just find it too coincidental that the only video she allows comments to be published for happens to be the one that will earn her money, and its also the one that 4chan trolled because her links were spammed all over their site. Being surprised that 4chan rose to that sort of bait is like wondering why you got stung for shoving your fist in a wasp's nest. A quick scan of the comments to pick out some of the absolutely vile ones and bingo - instant sympathy and anyone expressing an opposing viewpoint is tainted so having an open and honest discussion becomes much more difficult.

 LordofHats wrote:
I did say earlier in the thread that, for something she was given a lot of money to do, Damsel in Distress may not have been the best trope to kick everything off with. There are better ones she could have done, like the root of nearly all the tropes I suspect she's likely to cover: Women are Delicate Would have been a much better way to set the stage. But then I never credited her with being good at what she's doing so *shrugs*

It may not have been the best one to kick it off with, but is was one of the easier ones. All she had to do was take feminist critiques of fairytales and cinema, remove most of the academic language (except when she wants to display some academic prowess) and repeat them, but with examples from video games (mainly the Nintendo series that rehases the same plot for almost every game).
The "Woman Are Delicate" trope might be later in the series should she try and take several different tropes and attempt to link them with a central theme.

 Soladrin wrote:
Mhm, the main problem with the word feminist is that for most people it's seen as what's actually misandrist.

The main problem is that there are two distinct groups that lay claim to that word - sex-positive feminists and anti-porn feminists - one of which is happy to accuse innocent people of hurting women by not conforming to their orthodoxy. It's like how vegetarians sometimes find themselves being tarred with the same brush as the "meat is murder" loons.

Women are delicate does have some truth in television. It certainly doesn't help that it is entirely acceptable (in America at least) for a girl to cry over a broken nail, but if a guy did so he would be a "sissy".
Even though there is no consistent standard for what makes a girl 'tough', it seems to me to be consistently lower than the minimum standard for a boy to not be a wimp.

Everything I see in regards to physical injuries suggests that women get injured more frequently. ACL injuries are a big one and from what I understand that often stems from overdeveloped quadriceps relative to hamstring muscles due to differences in skeletal structure.

Mentally though, there should really be a minimal difference between genders. Men whine plenty when they can get away with it.

 AlexHolker wrote:
The main problem is that there are two distinct groups that lay claim to that word - sex-positive feminists and anti-porn feminists - one of which is happy to accuse innocent people of hurting women by not conforming to their orthodoxy. It's like how vegetarians sometimes find themselves being tarred with the same brush as the "meat is murder" loons.

Sadly, as with any group, often its the more extreme elements that get the most attention and publicity.

 Amaya wrote:
Women are delicate does have some truth in television. It certainly doesn't help that it is entirely acceptable (in America at least) for a girl to cry over a broken nail, but if a guy did so he would be a "sissy".

While I disagree often with TV Tropes on details, I'm gonna run with them in saying that Women are Delicate is ultimately the most dominant trope related to women in all media. Even in chick flicks you'll often see women being presented in a more 'delicate' light than men. It even extends out of entertainment media.

Example:

Two events occur. A woman walks down a street and is mugged. Elsewhere, a man walks down a street and gets mugged. Both lose $20 and the credit cards and ID.

The woman is more likely to make it into the news solely because she is a woman. There will be the group of people with the typical "why are you walking down the street in the first place" comments, but the rest will typically be summed up by "that sucks" and "how dare he mug this nice lady." And of course the white knight comments "I see a guy being mean to a lady and I show him what for." The guy, is less likely to make it into the news just because he's a guy. Most comments will probably be summed up with "that sucks" and "you're a panzy I'd of beaten the guy up."

Inherently, society care more that the woman was mugged than the man. The woman will be treated as someone who needs protection (whether in the form of not walking down the street at all or in the form that attacking her is more a disreputable crime). The man on the other hand is going to garner sympathy, and might have his masculinity called into question, but will mostly be given a there there pat on the back get on with life now. I'll also note it's mostly likely going to be inherently assumed, that the mugger was probably male, further reinforcing the idea that a woman is delicate because no woman would mug someone.

Trope in real life yo.

 AlexHolker wrote:

 Soladrin wrote:
Mhm, the main problem with the word feminist is that for most people it's seen as what's actually misandrist.

The main problem is that there are two distinct groups that lay claim to that word - sex-positive feminists and anti-porn feminists - one of which is happy to accuse innocent people of hurting women by not conforming to their orthodoxy. It's like how vegetarians sometimes find themselves being tarred with the same brush as the "meat is murder" loons.

It does depend which phase of feminism they associate with. Post-feminism tends to use sexuality as a method of gaining power while 1st or second wave feminism is much more old fashioned in their feminism but are mostly just misandrists masquerading as feminists.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Amaya wrote:
Women are delicate does have some truth in television. It certainly doesn't help that it is entirely acceptable (in America at least) for a girl to cry over a broken nail, but if a guy did so he would be a "sissy".

Spoiler:

While I disagree often with TV Tropes on details, I'm gonna run with them in saying that Women are Delicate is ultimately the most dominant trope related to women in all media. Even in chick flicks you'll often see women being presented in a more 'delicate' light than men. It even extends out of entertainment media.

Example:

Two events occur. A woman walks down a street and is mugged. Elsewhere, a man walks down a street and gets mugged. Both lose $20 and the credit cards and ID.

The woman is more likely to make it into the news solely because she is a woman. There will be the group of people with the typical "why are you walking down the street in the first place" comments, but the rest will typically be summed up by "that sucks" and "how dare he mug this nice lady." And of course the white knight comments "I see a guy being mean to a lady and I show him what for." The guy, is less likely to make it into the news just because he's a guy. Most comments will probably be summed up with "that sucks" and "you're a panzy I'd of beaten the guy up."

Inherently, society care more that the woman was mugged than the man. The woman will be treated as someone who needs protection (whether in the form of not walking down the street at all or in the form that attacking her is more a disreputable crime). The man on the other hand is going to garner sympathy, and might have his masculinity called into question, but will mostly be given a there there pat on the back get on with life now. I'll also note it's mostly likely going to be inherently assumed, that the mugger was probably male, further reinforcing the idea that a woman is delicate because no woman would mug someone.

Trope in real life yo.

Ah, the implications! Like how male rape/sexual harassment cases aren't taken seriously but with females the rapist might as well have been hitler. I remember reading about this female Russian store owner who was being robbed. What she did was capture the guy and held him against his will all the while raping him. Horrid story but, if I heard right, she received a lot of praise (A lot here meaning more than she should have). If the genders were reversed, the store owner would've been burned at the stake.

Sex inequality runs both ways, man, and that is my main issue with feminists. They want equality by focusing on only half of the population. As for the earlier poster, I don't see feminism as a dirty term just as I don't see democrat as a dirty term. I just disagree with both groups on a lot of things.

Note: Don't take my disagreement with feminists as a sign saying "Oh, he hates women because he doesn't think we should have equal rights!". I'm not saying women shouldn't have equal rights, I'm just saying that if they want them the focus on social issues should be, well, equal.

Well, women definitely suffer the brunt of it more than men. My main issue with this stuff though is that the discussion is almost always twisted in some stupid direction (Rather than actually talking about portrays of the sexes, their roles in a narrative get debated which is a stupid way to talk about the issue). In some ways some of the stuff now directed at men is a direct result of society attempting to adjust to meet women's expectations.

Continuing the trope examples: Higher Education is for Women because if there's a bossy know it all in the group, it's probably a girl. Examples include Hermione, Annabeth Chase, Sakura Haruno, Lisa Simpson, and Kim Possible (though I'll not most of these examples I would not consider sexist). It is often invoked in RPG's as well, and the Japanese LOVE this trope. Almost any given Anime/Manga will use it, as will many J-RPG's.

This trope spawned from the desire of women for stronger representation of their gender in media, and in search of a strong female presence, media producers went with what most Western societies consider positive qualities (intelligence, education, class, confidence). Most sitcoms invoke this trope (and anything made by Seth MacFarlane). These educated female protagonists, were added on top of a fairly standard male protagonist type to try and appeal to women.

The end result though is that now we have a common habit of women often being portrayed as more intelligent and dedicated, and men being lazy and stupid in ways far in excess of actual societal reflections. This is completely unintentional trend in media and it's ironic that feminism is responsible for it's rise. And this isn't to say that it's only negative towards men. The trope is often invoked be invoked in ways that reflect poorly on men and women. The women are often bossy, or so book smart they need the male character to educate them about real life or some such (So even still, men come out on top a lot of the time).

EDIT: Gah. My head got sidetracked while typing this out. Really what I'm referencing isn't one trope but rather a collection of them that embody the idea "girls are smarter than boys" and how these tropes have become much more common since the fight for women's rights began.

What about Tropes Vs. Men. Men in sitcoms(especially fathers) tend to be portrayed as idiots, For example, Set Mcfarlene shows and the Simpsons show nearly all them men in the ahow as incapable of higher level thinking.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
What about Tropes Vs. Men. Men in sitcoms(especially fathers) tend to be portrayed as idiots, For example, Set Mcfarlene shows and the Simpsons show nearly all them men in the ahow as incapable of higher level thinking.

To be fair men are often stereotyped just as much as women in media and society, if not more so as it's seems tomboys are more accepted than feminine men .

Yeah, except men don't give a gak.