Also... Just so everyone knows: the points of these videos are to point out systemic issues and their implementation. It isn't actually about defining games as good or bad (and certainly not about defining these uses of the tropes to be the worst) - it's actually about using them as a more general narrative of what they represent: context is actually irrelevant. I know that probably seems incredibly counter-intuitive: context must be relevant - but seriously, - but this isn't about specific games, it's about the ideas themselves.
That is complete bullshit. Exactly the sort of dreck I encountered in art school art theory courses. All that is produced when writing this way is a circular blather piece that is about an imaginary hypothetical with no basis in reality, divorced from all reason and accountability. It's junk.
Moreover, Anita herself has never suggested anything of the sort. I'm not entirely sure that the world 'subjective' is even a part of her vocabulary.
Context is extremely important, and taking things wildly out of context to support an argument is something that should never be tolerated.
Do you mean she never suggested the subjective bit or the ignoring context bit? I don't remember her mentioning anything about the former, but she definitely mentioned the latter. I'm not about to subject myself to her older videos to point out where she says it, but people are welcome to sit through them again if they want to check it out for themselves.
The subjective bit. The ignoring context bit just weakens her argument, even if she does admit to it. But it only weakens her argument to those who already understand the context. To everyone else, they have no idea what is a good example of her topic, and what is being taken wildly out of context.
Mentioning female NPC "sex objects" running away from the player when they are threatened with violence, and not explaining that male characters will often do the exact same thing is creating a lie. That isn't far removed from when Fox News used the Mass Effect sex scenes to paint the picture that Bioware was practically creating a porn game. At least the Fox News host eventually admitted that she had no idea what she was talking about, and also eventually agreed that the scenes in question were actually quite mild.
Ironically, at a couple of points in this video, the woman opposed to Mass Effect sounds a lot like Anita Sarkeesian:
Saying--and I'm paraphrasing here--"some of these scenes are explained by gameplay or story, but it's still problematic that they exist" or whatever Anita has said, is still being extremely disingenuous in her argument. It's a lot like making a giant list of examples to prove your point, and then saying "now some of these examples are complete lies, but that's okay because they could have happened."
What bothers me most is how needless it is. So what if her video would be 20 minutes instead of 30? There's enough actual examples of her criticism that she shouldn't have to resort to taking anything out of context.
And of course I've never heard her mention subjectivity. Saying "I'm not really right or wrong about a lot of this, and it's all a matter of opinion what someone personally feels is sexist" would dramatically weaken any feminist argument, just as a similar statement would weaken an argument concerning just about any topic.