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.

It is in fact possible to criticize Anita Sarkeesians videos without being an “MRA”, misogynist or whatever label you might wish to apply. It is in fact possible to find some value from these videos even if you don't agree with everything presented. It is in fact possible to agree with what is being said without being labelled a “SJW”, feminazi or whatever label you might to apply. A shocker perhaps, but it's even possible to dislike a person for reasons valid or invalid and still be able to consume their work.

Did it really take this long for someone to say this?

 DarkNecro wrote:
http://blueplz.blogspot.com.au/2014/08/this-game-supports-more-than-two-players.html

And Discussion like this is why i like TB

Main problem discussing anything like this at moment is the polarisation of the topic so much that is devolves into us vs them too much to even have a proper discussion

ive fallen into the same trap many times and the biggest thing ive taken away from it is Empathy is the most important tool we have
May be time to use it a bit more

Well, damn if that wasn't inspiring. Thanks for sharing that. Starting a new thread with you quoted

 jreilly89 wrote:

 DarkNecro wrote:
http://blueplz.blogspot.com.au/2014/08/this-game-supports-more-than-two-players.html

And Discussion like this is why i like TB

Main problem discussing anything like this at moment is the polarisation of the topic so much that is devolves into us vs them too much to even have a proper discussion

ive fallen into the same trap many times and the biggest thing ive taken away from it is Empathy is the most important tool we have
May be time to use it a bit more

Well, damn if that wasn't inspiring. Thanks for sharing that. Starting a new thread with you quoted

Aww you are so sweet

 DarkNecro wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 DarkNecro wrote:
http://blueplz.blogspot.com.au/2014/08/this-game-supports-more-than-two-players.html

And Discussion like this is why i like TB

Main problem discussing anything like this at moment is the polarisation of the topic so much that is devolves into us vs them too much to even have a proper discussion

ive fallen into the same trap many times and the biggest thing ive taken away from it is Empathy is the most important tool we have
May be time to use it a bit more

Well, damn if that wasn't inspiring. Thanks for sharing that. Starting a new thread with you quoted

Aww you are so sweet

Seriously. That was probably the smartest thing I have read today. After a really crappy day, involving a broken LRC, I needed that article. Cool beans

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Crablezworth wrote:
Another stern talking too, because all gamers did this: http://www.polygon.com/2014/8/28/6078391/video-games-awful-week

Everyon who ever touched a controller is at fault for this. For cereal guys

Please don't just post a picture, that's spam mate.

jreilly89 wrote:a) All white protagonists in video games could ABSOLUTELY be argued as a trope. It happens as much in the same vein as misogyny, and is racially motivated.

Here you actually have a point I must support you on. Games (and by extension movies/TV series) are prone to defaulting to "white heterosexual male", which is of course several tropes in combination, if one wanted to argue that way. Personally, I see it as a single cliché, though, as there can be only one default.

That being said, I suppose it's not as hotly debated because you don't have two firmly entrenched armies of opposed crusaders, for whom this is just one of several fronts. If racism were to be identified in a game, I'd expect the vast majority of posters to quickly agree and condemn it, thus concluding the thread. Sexism, on the other hand, divides the readers into two camps. Largely, I suspect, because most of those readers will already have formed an opinion that transcends gaming, if you've seen those topics in dakka OT.

It might also be that it's not just a matter of omission, but depiction in those few games that do have such characters. If video games were to portray Black people as criminals with the same regularity and exposure that they seem to portray women in skimpy outfits and/or as damsels-in-distress, we might indeed have a greater controversy here. If this is the case, I haven't perceived it that way, but that might just be because I know few games that have non-White characters in the first place.

We definitively need a greater variety in games in general, that is I hope without question.
One of the reasons for why I purchased and enjoyed Sleeping Dogs was that its protagonist, whilst male, was an Asian for a change.

Slarg232 wrote:

It is in fact possible to criticize Anita Sarkeesians videos without being an “MRA”, misogynist or whatever label you might wish to apply. It is in fact possible to find some value from these videos even if you don't agree with everything presented. It is in fact possible to agree with what is being said without being labelled a “SJW”, feminazi or whatever label you might to apply. A shocker perhaps, but it's even possible to dislike a person for reasons valid or invalid and still be able to consume their work.

Did it really take this long for someone to say this?

I like to believe that a lot of people think this way, but unfortunately threads like these quickly escalate into polarised mud-slinging, thanks to certain inflammatory comments. And at that point, with everyone being so involved and emotional, it gets easy to "loose one's cool" .

I'd wager that a good debate on such a controversial topic would require heavy-handed moderation - removing posters of any aggressive comments from the thread right away - and likely would have to be restarted several times over.

 Lynata wrote:

jreilly89 wrote:a) All white protagonists in video games could ABSOLUTELY be argued as a trope. It happens as much in the same vein as misogyny, and is racially motivated.

Here you actually have a point I must support you on. Games (and by extension movies/TV series) are prone to defaulting to "white heterosexual male", which is of course several tropes in combination, if one wanted to argue that way. Personally, I see it as a single cliché, though, as there can be only one default.

That being said, I suppose it's not as hotly debated because you don't have two firmly entrenched armies of opposed crusaders, for whom this is just one of several fronts. If racism were to be identified in a game, I'd expect the vast majority of posters to quickly agree and condemn it, thus concluding the thread. Sexism, on the other hand, divides the readers into two camps. Largely, I suspect, because most of those readers will already have formed an opinion that transcends gaming, if you've seen those topics in dakka OT.

It might also be that it's not just a matter of omission, but depiction in those few games that do have such characters. If video games were to portray Black people as criminals with the same regularity and exposure that they seem to portray women in skimpy outfits and/or as damsels-in-distress, we might indeed have a greater controversy here. If this is the case, I haven't perceived it that way, but that might just be because I know few games that have non-White characters in the first place.

We definitively need a greater variety in games in general, that is I hope without question.
One of the reasons for why I purchased and enjoyed Sleeping Dogs was that its protagonist, whilst male, was an Asian for a change.

Video games do have a thing with race. I have even seen it talked about a few times and funny enough it did involve a backlash component featuring racist comments. Much like what happened, is happening with the tropes Vs women videos. (I have even see a little talk about homosexuality in games.) I think the difference with these issues is that there isn't really a high profile video series dealing with it. (At least not as it relates to games.)

Oh fun fact about sleeping dogs. Early in development, it was called black widow and was going to have a female protagonist.

nomotog wrote:(I have even see a little talk about homosexuality in games.) I think the difference with these issues is that there isn't really a high profile video series dealing with it. (At least not as it relates to games.)

You mean a video series basically functioning like some sort of "wake-up call" for opponents and supporters of whatever theory is presented? Maybe. At this point I find it difficult to judge just how much Mrs. Sarkeesian's videos have actually influenced the industry. I've not watched a single one of them, but was made aware of the issue by various other sources, mostly developer interviews. It is, of course, possible that those were just a reaction, but I like to believe that both the videos as well as the latent shift in some segments of the gaming industry are part of a general evolution of society.

As for the homosexuality ... whewww, I definitively recall a time when this was indeed a hotly debated topic on the web. Especially when it came to BioWare's games, from the "public outrage" (I think even Fox News covered this ) at certain choices you were able to make when it comes to romances, right up to the "gay planet" in SWTOR (ironically called that way because here you'll find the only four homosexual NPCs of the entire galaxy, as far as the game is concerned).

Up to this day you have a thread on the SWTOR forums with several hundred pages asking for gay/lesbian companions, and another almost equally long thread condemning the whole idea because "eww homos". I think various organisations like Christian Mothers or whatever they're called wanted people to boykott that title, which sadly might be the reason for why Makeb was all that people got, in spite of the devs having promised more, and BioWare's general spearhead role in this regard.

nomotog wrote:Oh fun fact about sleeping dogs. Early in development, it was called black widow and was going to have a female protagonist.

Huh, I did not know this. I wonder what made them change their plans, given the trouble Remember Me went through.
Did it also have a different plot, or just a different name and character design?

 Lynata wrote:

nomotog wrote:(I have even see a little talk about homosexuality in games.) I think the difference with these issues is that there isn't really a high profile video series dealing with it. (At least not as it relates to games.)

You mean a video series basically functioning like some sort of "wake-up call" for opponents and supporters of whatever theory is presented? Maybe. At this point I find it difficult to judge just how much Mrs. Sarkeesian's videos have actually influenced the industry. I've not watched a single one of them, but was made aware of the issue by various other sources, mostly developer interviews. It is, of course, possible that those were just a reaction, but I like to believe that both the videos as well as the latent shift in some segments of the gaming industry are part of a general evolution of society.

As for the homosexuality ... whewww, I definitively recall a time when this was indeed a hotly debated topic on the web. Especially when it came to BioWare's games, from the "public outrage" (I think even Fox News covered this ) at certain choices you were able to make when it comes to romances, right up to the "gay planet" in SWTOR (ironically called that way because here you'll find the only four homosexual NPCs of the entire galaxy, as far as the game is concerned).

Up to this day you have a thread on the SWTOR forums with several hundred pages asking for gay/lesbian companions, and another almost equally long thread condemning the whole idea because "eww homos". I think various organisations like Christian Mothers or whatever they're called wanted people to boykott that title, which sadly might be the reason for why Makeb was all that people got, in spite of the devs having promised more, and BioWare's general spearhead role in this regard.

nomotog wrote:Oh fun fact about sleeping dogs. Early in development, it was called black widow and was going to have a female protagonist.

Huh, I did not know this. I wonder what made them change their plans, given the trouble Remember Me went through.
Did it also have a different plot, or just a different name and character design?

The videos have had an influence. It is a thing now. People talk about the treatment of women in games and are more aware of different things now then they were before. Something like assassin's creed unity would have gone by without anyone saying anything a few years ago. Now, people notice and they say something.

Oh ya biowere. They are kind of ahead of the curve on this. Lesbian ninjas, and gay space marines FTW. It just hasn't seemed to bleed out too much into other areas of games yet.

I don't recall if a reason was ever given. It was changed rather early before the game was a true crime game, so I imagine it was going to be a totally different story. I just recall being really bummed because I would have liked to play that game. Edit: Turns out it was called Black Lotus and avtivision did make them change it because they thought it would make them more money. A clear case of the bias companies have about female characters.

nomotog wrote:
Oh ya biowere. They are kind of ahead of the curve on this. Lesbian ninjas, and gay space marines FTW. It just hasn't seemed to bleed out too much into other areas of games yet.

Probably because most people don't give a gak either way. Bioware's certainly leading that particular crusade, sure, but that's largely a result of them steadily losing the talent that got them to where they are today in favor of having some of their more obscure voices take things over. And it hasn't been for the better; their games - as games, anyway, in the sense of "engaging gameplay" - are getting progressively worse, from "awesome button" nonsense to "RPGs" you can beat on their hardest setting without ever spending a skill point. But they've found a niche, and while it may be a shallow one, it's broad enough to keep them mostly profitable.

Edit: Turns out it was called Black Lotus and avtivision did make them change it because they thought it would make them more money. A clear case of the bias companies have about female characters.

An economic bias, you mean?

 Seaward wrote:
Probably because most people don't give a gak either way.

Considering that the discussion is ongoing and over multiple places it would seem that people actually do give a gak.

 Seaward wrote:
An economic bias, you mean?

Perhaps in the sense that it is a truthiness that women don't buy or play games, but reality doesn't seem to hold up to that nonsense. Studios have realized that women watch and pay for movies, and it is also true they play games in large numbers..

 Ahtman wrote:
Considering that the discussion is ongoing and over multiple places it would seem that people actually do give a gak.

If you mean blogs? No, that doesn't mean anything. People on their periphery of the gaming world make a living talking about nonsense issues. Just like the real media.

Perhaps in the sense that it is a truthiness that women don't buy or play games, but reality doesn't seem to hold up to that nonsense. Studios have realized that women watch and pay for movies, and it is also true they play games in large numbers..

What does that include? Mobile games like Candy Crush Saga and Angry Birds? Or are we exclusively talking console/PC games that the AAA developers we're talking about market to?

Either way, I don't recall saying, "Women don't play videogames," so I'm not sure why you'd erect such a muscular strawman, especially given your shrieking protests whenever you believe anyone else does so. Women certainly play videogames. The argument was that in the specific instance being referenced, a publisher believed a male protagonist would sell better than a female one. Not something that's necessarily true across the many, many, many genres of videogames, but likely true in some. And really, these studies trumpeting the vast swaths of women who game are nothing new; either developers and publishers are ignoring them because they hate women, or they're ignoring them because their own internal market research says, "Yes, women do game, but they don't go in for the type of game we're making in big numbers."

And you ultimately can't have it both ways; large publishers (and developers, for that matter) cannot both be amoral, greedy entities that will squeeze every last penny out of gamers and deliberately leaving money on the table in the name of sexism.

 Ahtman wrote:
Studios have realized that women watch and pay for movies, and it is also true they play games in large numbers..

Don't quote poor studies when we're talkin economics please. The ESA does a terrible job at properly researching their data. Games that tend to be favored by women have a vastly different profit model than traditional games, preferred by men, have. It all boils down to what you think a "gamer" is. To the ESA, that is everyone who plays any sort of game on his mobile device at least a few times each week. That's about the worst meaning you could use.

Actual studies filter gender preference by category and those shows a vast bias in favor of men. Thus it makes the most sense to cater to them, i.e. the three big B: Blood, Boobs, Boom.

 Lynata wrote:

nomotog wrote:(I have even see a little talk about homosexuality in games.) I think the difference with these issues is that there isn't really a high profile video series dealing with it. (At least not as it relates to games.)

You mean a video series basically functioning like some sort of "wake-up call" for opponents and supporters of whatever theory is presented? Maybe. At this point I find it difficult to judge just how much Mrs. Sarkeesian's videos have actually influenced the industry. I've not watched a single one of them, but was made aware of the issue by various other sources, mostly developer interviews. It is, of course, possible that those were just a reaction, but I like to believe that both the videos as well as the latent shift in some segments of the gaming industry are part of a general evolution of society.

Then do yourself and everybody else here a favour and go WATCH them. Second hand information does not make an informed opinion.

 Seaward wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:
Considering that the discussion is ongoing and over multiple places it would seem that people actually do give a gak.

If you mean blogs? No, that doesn't mean anything.

You, personally, are debating this in multiple places on this very forum.

People care. This is clearly an important issue for gaming culture to be discussing.

 Melissia wrote:
You, personally, are debating this in multiple places on this very forum.

Since I'm not interested in talking about me, which apparently this conversation is now shifting towards being about, I'm going to go play warframe instead.

People care. This is clearly an important issue for gaming culture to be discussing.

Because people are talking about it on forums? I debate all sorts of gak I don't genuinely care about on forums, including 40K. and videogames.

 Seaward wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
You, personally, are debating this in multiple places on this very forum.

Since I'm not interested in talking about me, which apparently this conversation is now shifting towards being about, I'm going to go play warframe instead.

I used your posts as an example to lead to the second point. You are not the focal point of my post.

 Seaward wrote:

People care. This is clearly an important issue for gaming culture to be discussing.

Because people are talking about it on forums? I debate all sorts of gak I don't genuinely care about on forums, including 40K. and videogames.

That's your problem. A lot of people clearly do care. And we should care, because it remains an important issue-- more than one issue, even. The issue of journalistic integrity in game reporting is important. The topic of sexism in gaming culture is, likewise, a valuable topic to discuss.

It's no doubt that we aren't doing a good job discussing these topics, but that the discussion is happening in the first place is a good thing. Ten years ago, neither one of these topics was really mentioned outside of a few, mostly ignored voices.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Then do yourself and everybody else here a favour and go WATCH them. Second hand information does not make an informed opinion.

Oh yeah, I've seen some of those videos. Honestly, I laughed my ass off at the crap coming from her mouth. She's being a gigantic hypocrite, especially about "Gender Signifiers".

 The Grumpy Eldar wrote:
She's being a gigantic hypocrite, especially about "Gender Signifiers".

No she isn't.

There's a very big difference between someone choosing to wear something of their own volition, and an author's choice on what a fictional character wears.

 The Grumpy Eldar wrote:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

Then do yourself and everybody else here a favour and go WATCH them. Second hand information does not make an informed opinion.

Oh yeah, I've seen some of those videos. Honestly, I laughed my ass off at the crap coming from her mouth. She's being a gigantic hypocrite, especially about "Gender Signifiers".

yeah, that was hilarious. If she'd used the bare minimum of makeup and no jewellery, I would at least respect her for sticking to her principles.

It's a weird contradiction it seems... Feminists decry female sexualisation and objectification in media, yet simultaneously decry any criticism of their right to sexualise themselves (anti slut shaming protests etc).

On a side note... I don't find heavy use of makeup particularly attractive on woman attractive in general, for the same reason I found the classic "sex idol" Lara Croft depiction annoying , but much preferred the 2013 depiction - hyper sexualized characters tend to come across as fake and unrealistic. Similarly, I tend to dislike the cliched "male power fantasy" (as Melissia and Lynata put it) of hyper muscled steroid fuelled Incredible Hulk like male characters typical in MMOs like WOW.

You're pointing out something that simply isn't hypocrisy and claiming that it is.

A woman's sexuality should be owned by the woman in question. That's an entirely different subject from the sexual depiction of fictional women by mostly male authors/artists/advertisers/etc.

There's no contradiction in owning your own sexuality while criticizing video games for sexist depiction of women.

The issue of journalistic integrity in game reporting is important.

We have completely different definitions of "important" then. lol

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:

The issue of journalistic integrity in game reporting is important.

We have completely different definitions of "important" then. lol

to be fair, its only important to most of the people in this thread when its a woman pretending to be victimized, otherwise it isn't.

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:

The issue of journalistic integrity in game reporting is important.

We have completely different definitions of "important" then. lol

Just because one thing is important doean't mean that other things aren't also important, or that it necessarily ranks as "the mots improtnat tihng evar, omg".

The very word "important" suggests a ranking of subjects.

The reporting of video games and the integrity of it is VERY low on that list for me personally. So much so that I laughed when I read the part I quoted.

I'm not sure what the video game equivalent is for "playing with our toy soldiers" but I'd put it here if I knew it. Sometimes people lend WAY too much weight to silly things like this.

Games journalists would need to have integrity to lose it surely?

 Melissia wrote:

 The Grumpy Eldar wrote:
She's being a gigantic hypocrite, especially about "Gender Signifiers".

No she isn't.

There's a very big difference between someone choosing to wear something of their own volition, and an author's choice on what a fictional character wears.

Then she shouldn't whine about this being used in games. That's a choise made by the developers of a game, not by some whiny feminist.

Seriously, from my perspective she doesn't understand gaming culture, at all.

 The Grumpy Eldar wrote:
Then she shouldn't whine about this being used in games

Your argument does not follow any form of logic.

There is nothing hypocritical or contradictory about owning one's own sexuality while also pointing out the problems with sexism in the video game industry. That you attempt to insult and silence her instead of speak about her actual points does not lend itself to a coherent argument.

 Melissia wrote:
That you attempt to insult and silence her instead of speak about her actual points does not lend itself to a coherent argument.

Didn't you previously establish that silencing dissenting opinions is perfectly acceptable? Or is that only when your side does it?

 lord_blackfang wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
That you attempt to insult and silence her instead of speak about her actual points does not lend itself to a coherent argument.

Didn't you previously establish that silencing dissenting opinions is perfectly acceptable? Or is that only when your side does it?

The latter.

tl;dr of the entire discussion: Anita doesn't deserve any sort of these threats (if they are true, that is), but she called upon them by her dishonesty and purposefully stiring up hatred to cash in.