#551 Posted by JackG100 (404 posts) -

@kentonclay: I wouldn't say that, but yes. Stories in games are usually pretty crap, but usually story isn't the main draw of a game. And if it is, then it better not be crap.

Also, Anita is way too opinionated to be believable in the way she portrays games for me to listen. While I can understand some of her concerns, and agree with some of her points. I mostly feel she is grasping at straws, trying to make things look a lot worse than they really are. Yeah, more women play games nowadays, but men are usually the target audience. So why would it make sense to have more female protagonists for instance.

And the fact that important female characters get killed of, is because protagonists are mostly male. It is common in all storytelling to kill off loved ones in order to motivate the main character, it does not demean the gender of the person getting killed off in any way or form. Unless you are ofc. a feminist looking for a cause.

And I am sure many a white knight will ride forth and argue against that.

#552 Edited by SpaceInsomniac (3557 posts) -

@inkerman said:

My issue is that she seems to have consistently levelled criticism against video games, yet this is a problem which pervades almost all media. In fact, given the relative youth of video games a media type, we've come a long way in such a short time. I think it's perhaps disingenuous to criticise the video game industry when this is a much wider problem.

She started with TV and movies. She's been doing this sort of thing for a while. Watch the video in post 545, and you'll see for yourself.

@jackg100 said:

@kentonclay: I wouldn't say that, but yes. Stories in games are usually pretty crap, but usually story isn't the main draw of a game. And if it is, then it better not be crap.

Also, Anita is way too opinionated to be believable in the way she portrays games for me to listen. While I can understand some of her concerns, and agree with some of her points. I mostly feel she is grasping at straws, trying to make things look a lot worse than they really are. Yeah, more women play games nowadays, but men are usually the target audience. So why would it make sense to have more female protagonists for instance.

A far more telling statistic--and something that actually is a statistic--is that only 18 percent of Mass Effect 2 or 3 playthroughs used a female protagonist. Companies couldn't care less who plays their games, but they will focus on decisions that will make the majority of their audience happy.

Even if 90 percent of gamers were women, there still won't be more female protagonists until that 18 percent is much, much higher. Sucks for me, though, because I'm in that 18 percent. Fem Shepard all the way.

#553 Posted by egg (1450 posts) -

THE HARMFUL MISOGYNIST MYTH THAT THIS TROPE REINFORCES.....

#554 Edited by GnaTSoL (791 posts) -

Who is that? WWE Layla? What what?

Online
#556 Edited by JackG100 (404 posts) -

@spaceinsomniac: Yeah, I like femshep and male shep both. I tend to play the male shep first since well, I'm a guy. Another telling statistic which I don't have any numbers on but have read in several places is that placing a female on the boxart actually make sales lower than putting a guy there. Which I personally find odd, but I suppose people like me who look up how a game is played and what its about before actually buying it is a minority in todays market.

#558 Posted by oodli (93 posts) -

Goddamnit i wrote like 500 words about this and i fucking pasted over it, wish i could do Ctrl+Z.

#559 Edited by Brodehouse (9587 posts) -

Talking about a 'pervasive culture of violence against women', I just want to point out that, in Western countries at least, men actually make up three quarters of assault and homicide victims. Apparently being 1 in 4 of victims in a nation where you make up 51% of the population is a pervasive culture of violence. It's as blown as the 'academia is keeping women out' myth, when women make up a majority of entrants and a larger majority of graduates.

And in preemptive capacity, I'm sure the numbers of violence against women increases in Muslim and third world countries, but I'm not sure Western media is responsible for that. Something tells me Mass Effect doesn't get a lot of play in populations that are illiterate and don't speak English. There's clearly some other major cultural factor that these nations have that leads them to treat women like dirt, but no one wants to talk about it because 'we have to show respect'.

#560 Edited by EnduranceFun (1114 posts) -

@brodehouse: This is why I will never respect radical feminism. It ignores real issues like the huge amount of interracial rape, Islamic fundamentalism's mistreatment of women and inequality for men, simply because it's politically incorrect to acknowledge them. There are reasons for all of these things beyond the obvious racist and sexist stereotypes you would initially believe, but those kind of gender hustling opportunists would rather ignore it even if there are thousands of people they could save from abuse just by breaking the silence. But silent they remain, because video games and movies are actually what cause a tiny disparity in real wages. Such a joke.

#561 Posted by Brodehouse (9587 posts) -

@endurancefun: It's largely about money, specifically for those who have careers and degrees in 'women's fields'. To have a career in the social justice field, to receive public money and grants, it is necessary to establish that there is injustice. And there have been myriad injustices throughout western history, and in a lot of cases, there continues to be. You may already see the problem forming for the people in the social justice field; if they actually succeed, they don't have a career anymore. There are no abolitionists or suffragettes anymore, because they succeeded at their work. In order to continue to get paid, brutal theocracies dominating and enslaving women are required, provided those theocracies are on the other side of the world, safely away from the people who seek to benefit from them. Every ridiculous witchcraft trial that ends with some innocent women being tortured and executed sends a flood of money to these people, from reasonable people who are naturally appalled by the abuses suffered by those women. Those women who suffer never actually benefit, but people in the West _feel better about it_ and that's really all that matters. People who sell cures don't like people who sell prevention. And people who sell prevention don't like people who sell vaccines.

#562 Posted by Daneian (1207 posts) -

I haven't watched the second video, but a claim I've seen attributed to it several times about how these tropes perpetuate domestic violence against women has given me pause.

How is that comment really any different than the one that gets made by politicians every time some maniac shoots up a school? The claim that X media causes/reinforces Y behavior is regularly shrugged off in those discussions, so why why are we so ready to admit a correlation when it has to do specifically with women? In my 25 years of playing videogames, I haven't been convinced that violent games lead to violent actions, but I find that much easier to accept than the notion that Princess Peach getting kidnapped by Bowser causes spousal/girlfriend battery.

If we accept one, don't we have to accept the other?

#563 Edited by Brodehouse (9587 posts) -

@daneian: You've caught on to a core logical problem I have with both of those lines of thinking. They both require the idea that Life Imitates Art, when the truth is is that Art Imitates Life. This is the mindset that sees a double knockout in UFC and assumes it's staged because bookers have written double knockout finishes in WWE (and why did they write those finishes? Because one time they saw a double knockout or thought of one and said 'this is super dramatic and could happen'). The idea that the television teaches you violence and you seek it out in life rather than life teaching you violence and you seek it out on television.

I suppose this line of thinking has some roots in postmodernism or the idea that all things only exist because we believe they exist. And we use it as a convenient excuse to cover our own responsibility. 'It's not my fault I overdosed on drugs and I beat up my girlfriend and .... It's society's fault! It's the media that made me this way!'

#564 Edited by Daneian (1207 posts) -

@brodehouse: I think it's much easier to understand. At its core, the argument that the Damsel in Distress trope perpetuates domestic violence assumes that all parties are approaching the debate from the same basic conclusion. This conclusion is this: individuals (and by extension characters) possessing a characteristic are representative of every individual with that characteristic. This allows one side to claim every artist who uses the trope views women as their possession and that every viewer is unable distinguish this individual from any group they might belong to. I, for one, reject this. A person only represents themselves.

Thinking like this excuses or dodges the possibility that individuals can be screwed up. The outcome holds the group responsible for the actions of one while simultaneously absolving that person from the responsibility of their own actions.

#565 Edited by magicwalnuts (81 posts) -

I agree with most of what Anita is saying, but I think her strength is also her main drawback. She approaches these videos in a largely academic fashion, only focusing on one argument, much like a thesis. So while all of what she's saying is true, convincing, and nicely organised; it also seemingly ignores much larger meta-realities such as different cultural inclinations towards patriarchy. One of the things that kind of really annoyed me was how many juicy examples she found in Japanese developed games. Well of course the Japanese games are going to be blatantly mysogynistic, Japanese culture is heavily patriarchal!

The other thing that annoyed me was her not mentioning the existence of many of these tropes in fiction dating all the way back to ancient Greece, but she does sort of indirectly acknowledge this by mentioning that the trope is both a product and a propagator of a long sexist western culture.

What people seem to be getting angry is a perceived blame being placed on devs for intentionally reusing the trope to propagate the idea that women are weak and need to be taken care of. She's not really doing this. She not only acknowledges that this is a widely used device in all media, but she also acknowledges that, in the case of western developers, the competition and risk leads to this desperate endeavor to distinguish their games from each other at any cost. She does, rightly IMO, say that it's irresponsible of developers to be so thoughtless with their story and design mechanics that they stick to cheap and harmful tropes like these.

For me personally, while the damsel in distress trope does bother me a bit as problematic, it's the sexualization of women in games that resonates a bit more with me. How many T&A shots did I sit through during the Mass Effect trilogy? Way too many. I would get behind Anita if she did something like that as well.

#566 Edited by Sursh (243 posts) -

didn't thunderfoot already own this bitch?

#567 Posted by Spitznock (482 posts) -

If a woman has a man's job and gets less recognition as well as lesser pay than that man would have received performing that same job with the same efficiency and by the same means, then yes, that's a problem.
But damsel's in distress, big breasts, or otherwise overly sexualized female characters in video games shouldn't bother you any more than buff, bloodthirsty male characters should.
Everything in created media is open to interpretation, and everyone chooses to interpret it differently.
It's no different than that thing your parents might have (/should have) told you about equality or sexual orientation when you were younger: If you're being offended by something, you should think about why it offends you.
If you don't like how characters are portrayed in media, don't consume that media. It's a big industry that is more welcome to indie output than ever before; if you think you can do better, make your own.

#568 Edited by LackingSaint (1771 posts) -

Apologies for bumping this topic after people have already talked it over to death, but I thought this was an interesting rebuttal to Anita's points:

#569 Edited by Darji (5294 posts) -

Apologies for bumping this topic after people have already talked it over to death, but I thought this was an interesting rebuttal to Anita's points:

Great Video. And I totally agree you can not archive equality by using words like feminism and patriarchy. Thumbs Up!!

#570 Posted by Brodehouse (9587 posts) -

@magicwalnuts: If you think Japanese games are misogynistic then I don't believe you understand what the word means. Even something like Dead or Alive with tits flopping all over does not advocate the hatred or subhuman status of women.

#571 Edited by Darji (5294 posts) -

@magicwalnuts: If you think Japanese games are misogynistic then I don't believe you understand what the word means. Even something like Dead or Alive with tits flopping all over does not advocate the hatred or subhuman status of women.

Some clearly are but most of them are 18+ titles for sure. The world of hentai games is strong and very scary.

#572 Posted by Nictel (2380 posts) -

@oodli said:

Goddamnit i wrote like 500 words about this and i fucking pasted over it, wish i could do Ctrl+Z.

I feel your pain. There are browser plugins that help with that. Lazarus: Form Recovery is a good example :)

#573 Posted by emma (11 posts) -

It's funny because I don't see half of what these feminists see. I honestly they look for things that aren't there... I mean, there is nothing about games that focuses more violence on women.

#574 Edited by JadeGL (748 posts) -

@emma: It's a sensitive and funny issue taken as a whole. I think nitpicking the portrayals of women in video games is not the real way to go in this broader conversation of women and games/gaming culture. It's a facet, but it's certainly not the biggest issue. I don't have issues with, for instance, the unrealistic body types of women in games (while I may find it hilarious and induces eye rolling, it's not something I get offended by at all) but I could understand why other people may look at the ridiculous bouncing boobs of DOA or Dragon's Crown and find it annoying etc.

I also understand why people would want there to be more interesting and realistic body types of both men and women in games. It's the same thing with movies and television, obviously. But movies and television have been getting complaints about this for years and games are now having a light shone on them, so it's a natural progression to have people now focusing on those issues in video games as well. Not a big deal and it doesn't mean that people "hate" games or want them to change what they are, just that with more people playing games, more people will have differing opinions about those games and will use the internet to voice those opinions.

My issues with women and video games tends to fall more in support or understanding of actual real people facing real issues in the real world. I keep using the word "real" to kind of drive home my point, but it's important to make that distinction, I think. I am of the belief that what a person does in a game - shooting people, running around cliff jumping, driving at 200+ miles and hour in some ridiculous sports car, doesn't reflect what that person will actually do in real life. Yes, some people may get ideas in their head from a game or movie, but that doesn't mean the game/movie caused it. It means that that person was perhaps predisposed to that act and had some issues (mental, social) that was the real cause.

However, there are real problems in the game industry that I have read about from people within it, how women are treated at conventions by both patrons and people in the industry itself, being an example, that need to be looked at. You can't brush off every instance that someone decides to talk about and we shouldn't ignore them and act as though every person who voices a problem is just overreacting. We also should be careful not to blame the entire industry when one jerk decides to say something offensive or grope a cos-player because, well, she should have expected that when she decided to dress as Lara Croft. The main problem is that we need a healthy dose of empathy and understanding. I think about the twitter campaign #1reasonwhy and about how some things seemed innocuous, to me, while others seemed pretty horrible, again to me as a female. I think that is where the empathy comes in.

For a lot of people, the lines are different of what is acceptable behavior and what is not, but I think that people need to realize that these issues, whether overblown or not, are never going to go away. Games and gaming culture is growing and with more people coming in and enjoying games, more people are going to be going to conventions, playing games, making games and talking about games. All of those people will have a different view and will have different ideas of what is acceptable and what is not. Some may overreact to a joke, some may overlook a very serious breach of conduct that a blogger writes about, and some may not care about how the sausage gets made at all and just want to ignore everything else entirely and focus on the new game that just dropped.

I find these issues important because I have been playing games and loving games for a long, long time. I can't remember a time when I wasn't playing games. And as someone who spends a ton of money and time on games I sometimes feel like speaking my mind on how a publisher decides to market a game, or how a game decides to portray a character, and I also have a desire to understand why those things come about in the first place. This video series may not be the right approach, but it is an approach and if it gets people talking and, more importantly, thinking about these issues, then it is not a bad thing.

#575 Edited by Sergio (2050 posts) -

If a woman has a man's job and gets less recognition as well as lesser pay than that man would have received performing that same job with the same efficiency and by the same means, then yes, that's a problem.

While I agree with this sentiment, it's not as simple as same job equals same pay, regardless of gender. There are several factors that actually determine pay for some jobs.

The level of education is one. A person with a masters degree may earn more than a person with a bachelors when hired because the employer needs to incentivize why the person with a higher education should work for them. This may come in the form of stock options some times.

The amount of experience one has in the given profession is another. A developer who has 20 years experience may be worth more than someone fresh out of college. An employer is not going to determine that the new hire is doing a similar job at the same level of efficiency and decide to give them a raise to match the veteran's salary.

Years of employment with that actual employer, taking leaves of absence into consideration, can affect promotions and your earnings. This last one tends to affect women more than men, although some states do allow paternity leave now.

If you're comparing companies in different parts of the country or an employer that has remote employees in a different state, the cost of living may be taken into account. I know I almost earned twice as much working in California than in Illinois, but then a house out here is about 4-5 times more expensive. If I were to move to Texas now and work remotely, I probably wouldn't get a pay raise for a few of years, but I'd be able to buy a house right away.

There was an article about a poll a while back regarding the pay differences between men and women in game development jobs divided by roles. I found it dubious because it didn't bother with these factors, and felt people trying to use those results as proof that something was wrong as disingenuous. This is a more important topic than how often is "damsel in distress" used as a trope, so I would have liked better analysis to determine if there was a real problem here. Taking these factors into account, a comparable woman should earn the same amount as a comparable man.

#576 Posted by Xshinobi (372 posts) -

Someone needs to explain to her what context means.

#577 Posted by egg (1450 posts) -

I saw Thunderfoot's part 1 vid way back and didn't think it was a good rebuttal, it felt more like a snarky forum reply. As a rebuttal it's not nearly as effective as Anita's own vids on TV and movies (which I only recently thought to check out) such as the one where she explains that erotic magazines are ok .... as long as they expressly portray consensual loving relationships and don't resort to objectification.¯\(°_o)/¯

#578 Edited by HellBound (1046 posts) -

I haven't watched these, nor do I plan to. I also think disabling comments defeats the purpose of even posting videos about stuff like this because it disables people to have conversations about.

Do I know why they get disabled? Obviously and yes, there usually is more harm then good at times. Not allowing discussion on the topic though just in my eyes makes people watch and forget. Someone watches the video and moves on. Instead of the chance of seeing someone say something thoughtful or engage in a prolonged discussion about the topic, it is 15 minutes and done.

Also I am pretty sure it was mentioned before, but the whole "I needed a kickstarter to do this" really bugs me.

@milkman This is something that also bugs me. Children are most impressionable, but even when they get to play these games I hardly see how they understand what a damsel in distress is. I see a Disney movie have more of an impression because they basically spell it out.

@carousel It is a controversial issue that will get lot's of views. She is laughing all the way to the bank. So yes nonsense

#579 Edited by HellBound (1046 posts) -

Also maybe this is sexism, maybe it is not, but most of the time when I get the option to play as a female I usually do. It is nice for a change and adds variety for me and I have friends that think a long the same path.

It just bugs me when people pick one specific thing to bitch about when other industries are worse. Why don't you start teaching these things in school and at home? I hardly see video games and a source of reaffirmation of sexism and gender roles or as the "starting" point.

Edit: last thing I have to say, her disclaimer "TRIGGER WARNING: This video contains a handful of graphic scenes involving violence against women. Parents should preview the video first before sharing with young children" is sexist against men. It is ok to not preview and show your kids because it is violence against men, but you MUST preview it because it is violence against women? Tsk tsk.

#580 Edited by Jumbs (234 posts) -

anyone who thinks thunderf00t 'owned' her is an idiot

well bye guys

#581 Edited by EnduranceFun (1114 posts) -

@jumbs: We'll miss your great posts.

#582 Edited by Sursh (243 posts) -

@egg said:

I saw Thunderfoot's part 1 vid way back and didn't think it was a good rebuttal, it felt more like a snarky forum reply. As a rebuttal it's not nearly as effective as Anita's own vids on TV and movies (which I only recently thought to check out) such as the one where she explains that erotic magazines are ok .... as long as they expressly portray consensual loving relationships and don't resort to objectification.¯\(°_o)/¯

i never really saw it as a rebuttal, just logical jabs at her contempt. he clearly displays how you effectively research a source in which you use to backup your claims against the realm of video games. i don't bother with most of her other vids.

also: "¯\(°_o)/¯" what the fuck is this thing? it looks like how a cat would look after you're finished putting staples in it.

#583 Edited by Darji (5294 posts) -

@egg said:

I saw Thunderfoot's part 1 vid way back and didn't think it was a good rebuttal, it felt more like a snarky forum reply. As a rebuttal it's not nearly as effective as Anita's own vids on TV and movies (which I only recently thought to check out) such as the one where she explains that erotic magazines are ok .... as long as they expressly portray consensual loving relationships and don't resort to objectification.¯\(°_o)/¯

What does this even mean? Anita herself even sees rescuing the person you love and care for as objectification. Regarding the sex topic Anita has a lot of critic from Sex positive feminists. Anita in general is very anti sex. As for his video. He actually had scientific arguments about it and make his points much clearer then Anita. Anita used lies to make her point and agenda more substantial.

#584 Edited by darkest4 (377 posts) -

There's just as many examples of "tropes" for men in video games.. I love how it's apparently not okay for women to suffer violent fates, but it's okay for men to. Many feminists are the worlds' biggest hypocrites and completely self centered, they want all the benefits of being a woman, all the benefits of being a man, and none of the negatives of either. Women and men are different, there's downsides and upsides to being either gender, as long as you have the same basic rights, like this woman does living in the US, she needs to get fucking over it.

Men like the female body, WHY do we have to be ashamed about this? It's been shown in many studies that males are more hard wired to value the physical traits of females. This is our NATURE, we are evolved to be attracted to the female form, enjoying looking at it is only natural. This is not something feminists should shame us for. As long as women aren't being forced against their will to show their own body, how the hell is this unfair or sexism for a girl to CHOOSE to be a booth babe, or for a completely fictional video game character with no real feelings to wear a skimpy outfit so people can derive extra visual pleasure from the game? WHO IS THE VICTIM THERE? No one, it's people doing what they want to do and enjoying seeing what they are naturally driven to enjoy seeing. There's plenty of men too in video games with buff bodies wearing no shirt, or real men CHOOSING to show off their body to women, I don't see feminists throwing a fit over that. And they shouldn't, because again, no victims.

And as for "tropes" of men feeling the need to protect women,,, again, this is our evolved NATURE, why should we be ashamed about it? Men, by nature, tend to be physically stronger, larger, with more muscle mass and thus more capable of defense, it's not "sexist" to acknowledge basic anatomy. So it's only natural that men traditionally are more often tasked with physically defending their family/clan in violent situations (which is what many games focus on obviously... or every game would just be games about going to work or studying for tests so theres never any violence.. o what fun).. So again what is the problem with being honest about how nature has evolved us? Why do we have to fight our nature so much, and try to make 2 physically distinct genders into the exact same thing, if we managed to do that we would not even be able to reproduce and continue our species, is that what feminists want? Not to mention, there's plenty of physically strong woman out there, and there's plenty of examples of woman defending men in video games. There's also plenty of weak male characters in games who have ability no defend themselves, but you don't see men crying out about that. These video game stories are only reflecting real life tendencies for men to feel very protective of their loved female counterparts, why is it bad for video games to reflect this reality? If feminists had their way, what would video games even look like? Characters only allowed to defend/protect/save members of their own sex in every single game???? Or no heroes at all? Every single character is equally strong and capable of defending themselves and theres no victims ever? Yea, those would surely be great realistic games..

Of course, there are some assholes out there who do real sexist/inappropriate hings, for both sexes, which impede on others' rights/freedom, like try to grope employees and fire them if they resist or woman not having equal rights in some Muslim countries or whatever else but none of the things this woman complains about are anywhere close to that, again there's no victims in any of the stuff she whines about except for her trying to make herself a victim cause she's apparently offended by the way we evolved. Honestly mostly this is just some unimaginative/repetitive/lazy story telling (that's the real problem with a lot of games). As long as both have equal human rights, which they do in our country at least, and aren't being forced to do things against their will, this is all just ridiculous. Woman living in some Muslim countries actually have legit reasons to call out sexism, the lady in this video living a cozy life in the US, with equal rights, is just being a selfish dramatard over nothing.

#585 Edited by altairre (1127 posts) -

Well at least I reacted just like she did when I found out the whole arm thing in Bionic commando.

@yinstarrunner said:

I like watching the videos to see all the games that these tropes are used in. I don't care for the over-analysis and the victim complex though.

As a creative person who enjoys writing a lot, it kind of worries me that someone might come along some day, point at something I've written, and claim that "it's sexist because x happens to y character." Even when I've spent hours upon hours creating that character, and giving them depth. Hopes, motivations, fears, idiosyncrasies, etc.

Obviously it makes sense to point at video game stories and say, "Hey, this is bullshit." Most all of them are. But are their reliance on common tropes really signs of serious sexism? All writers deal with tropes. It's unavoidable. The point is to create characters around them that people can care about. A lot of the best stories in all mediums are simple things, crafted around tired tropes, but involving great characters.

THAT'S why video game stories are bullshit. Forget about tropes, forget about sexism. Scant few people in the industry know how to make characters that are people, instead of walking archetypes. Obviously when you have these wafer-thin characters to base your story around, you're going to HAVE to plug them into cookie-cutter tropes because that's all you can do to make a narrative. The problem with video games is that they don't offer a lot of time FOR characterization or meaningful character development, because the gameplay rightfully takes precedence.

And that's why I don't care about stories in video games.

Scrolling through the replies to find an opinion that closely resembles my own paid off. You make a few great points.

The last paragraph reminded me of my latest playthrough of Ninja Gaiden 3: Razor's Edge. That game is a pure power fantasy, I acknowledge that and in the given context that's fine. I had a fun with it because I enjoy the gameplay mechanics a lot. Of course the story seems like it was written by a crazy person. None of the chracters matter, there is no depth (there doesn't necessarily has to be) and there is a feature that makes the boobs of the female characters jiggle if you shake the controler. All of this has neither an impact on how I see women nor does it represent it. Gameplay comes first and that's one reason why it's so hard to do both, have enjoyable mechanics and a well thought out story. The fact that big titles have to make a shitton of money doesn't help either because it means that you (seemingly) have to base it on something that showed to be effective with a broad audience (tropes).

I can enjoy tropes, even overused ones because it's fiction. What matters is how you approach these tropes. Everyone is able to create a story with the damsel in distress trope however I'd probably only enjoy a few of these stories. It's about context, it's about dialogue, it's about depth, it's about personal taste of course and it's about interpretation. This videoseries offers a few possible interpretations, for example that saving kidnapped women represents regaining posession. That doesn't mean that everybody sees it that way just that there might be some that do.

In addition to that correlation does not mean causality. Just because you show that there are a lot of cases you think to be sexist in a certain medium and you feel that sexism is a big problem overall does not mean that there is a meaningful causal link between them (eventhough there might be). One of the things I studied included research design and the video @lackingsaint posted has a point in that you can't derive a hypothesis and only look for evidence that goes along with it. That's why this video series is not helpful to adress a possible problem it might only be helpful to attract attention and I feel that there are a lot of other sources who did exactly that lately without demaning money for it on Kickstarter.

"I look at the way women are portrayed in mass media and the impact they have on our culture and society."

That's from her Kickstarter page and it shows the problem I have with how she presents herself. What she really is doing is looking at one popular way women are portrayed in mass media but not the impact that has on culture and society. For that she would actually need a lot of money and time. Creating a fairly simple structured youtube series is not it.

Still I'll continue to watch these videos because they show interesting patterns in games and the different approaches to them (some more, some less interesting) in a pretty condensed form.

Online
#586 Edited by PolkaDuke (10 posts) -

I'm not going to wade into this debate because that is a terrifying proposition.

But what the fuck does she have in her ears? I'm not sure I can take anyone wearing earrings the size of Bournemouth seriously.

#587 Posted by SpaceInsomniac (3557 posts) -

I'm not going to wade into this debate because that is a terrifying proposition.

But what the fuck does she have in her ears?

I believe those are referred to in the jewelry world as bracelets.