"We already have threads about Sarkeesian"

@TeflonBilly said:

@Animasta said:

@Napalm: that was before she did the whole kickstarter thing though, right? I mean if it wasn't then the point I was making that her videos weren't out yet would've been false and I'm sure OP would've LOVED to prove me wrong. It also depends on how much she played and how well constructed the argument was.

I mean that final dancing scene was fairly sexist even if I do think it wasn't on the whole.

Here you go, this is what we can look foward to.

I remember watching this. The best/worst part is when she makes the astounding leap that advertisements for Bayonetta encourage men to grope women on subway trains.

@TeflonBilly: my argument has nothing to do with her and everything to do with you, but hey! if you feel uncomfortable about me saying you shouldn't compare people who make youtube videos to terrorist organizations then feel free to bow out.

god you must think I care about her videos much more than I do, but to be honest I barely have an interest in her new videos so whateverrrrrrrr

@Sergio said:

@thedj93 said:

@Sergio said:

I'm less inclined to worry about how she may affect video games, and worry more about the negative affect she may have on feminism. Her diatribe may cause some people to ignore real issues if she's running around like the boy who cried wolf.

a cynical man would say that it's a clever internet marketing scheme to bring in the haters and drum up controversy which could raise awareness in the long term if the series can actually live up to its own hype

The likelihood of this is dubious to some given her track record. I highly doubt these past year(s) she's spent her time making questionable material to anger people to watch her intended masterpiece about video games. It's more likely that if she actually produces at least one good video in this series that she's already lost some who might have welcomed it.

yeah i meant more in the sense of how the series operates as a whole. as a rule, (in tropes v women) she usually cites examples from popular (and generally respected) shows and products that are almost certain to garner a response. however the less cynical side of me notes that maybe she's just using examples that people recognize so that she isn't spouting off controversial opinions into the aether cause then no one would know how to respond to what she's saying

@Animasta said:

@TeflonBilly: my argument has nothing to do with her and everything to do with you, but hey! if you feel uncomfortable about me saying you shouldn't compare people who make youtube videos to terrorist organizations then feel free to bow out.

god you must think I care about her videos much more than I do, but to be honest I barely have an interest in her new videos so whateverrrrrrrr

His initial post, which was actually made over a month ago, possibly around the time she shot up in notoriety, doesn't make such a comparison. His critique of her was perfectly valid as a topic to be discussed. Now, I didn't monitor what he might have said in other threads regarding this topic, but from this particular thread, you were the first to make the Hitler comparison, even if it was being facetious. I think his reply back wasn't serious, considering the moustache crackenwise.

@thedj93 said:

@Sergio said:

@thedj93 said:

@Sergio said:

I'm less inclined to worry about how she may affect video games, and worry more about the negative affect she may have on feminism. Her diatribe may cause some people to ignore real issues if she's running around like the boy who cried wolf.

a cynical man would say that it's a clever internet marketing scheme to bring in the haters and drum up controversy which could raise awareness in the long term if the series can actually live up to its own hype

The likelihood of this is dubious to some given her track record. I highly doubt these past year(s) she's spent her time making questionable material to anger people to watch her intended masterpiece about video games. It's more likely that if she actually produces at least one good video in this series that she's already lost some who might have welcomed it.

yeah i meant more in the sense of how the series operates as a whole. as a rule, (in tropes v women) she usually cites examples from popular (and generally respected) shows and products that are almost certain to garner a response. however the less cynical side of me notes that maybe she's just using examples that people recognize so that she isn't spouting off controversial opinions into the aether cause then no one would know how to respond to what she's saying

I think she just tends to run some of her own arguments off a cliff. I can agree with the general idea that Lego should be for boys and girls. However, I'm sure some girls would like the style of Lego she's complaining about. I know my niece welcomes all princess and girly things, but I still got her a snap circuits kit to try to spark her curiosity in science. I also thought it was silly that this kit was only displayed when I filtered toys for boys, when I know some women who would've loved that as young girls. So I can sometimes see where she's coming from, but then she throws it all away by some of the arguments and leaps of logic she makes.

@Sergio: The hitler comparison was over here. This thread kind of absorbed some of the arguments that were going on in that one.

Western women feel that women in traditionally Islamic lands are repressed because they can't expose their bodies in public.

Those same women tend (note: tend) to feel that western women are repressed because they expose so much of their bodies for attention. (Again, this is their opinion, and yes, I've actually talked to a number of these women. I tend to feel that these women are more repressed--with the potential of being stoned to death, etc.--but I do have an admittedly Western bias.)

I find it strange that so many women label themselves feminists, yet appoint their own views on how women should be treated. Some are very drastic; Others are just looking for simple decency. This person seems to be in it for the publicity, the sensationalism, and the money. There are some good conversations to be had on these topics, but being hyperbolic right at the outset is just going to push everyone to extremes of opinion. That's not good for anybody... well, no... it's good for pointing at people and saying, "Look! They're anti-women! Give me moneys!" but that seems counter-message and a bit exploitative.

@Sergio said:

I think she just tends to run some of her own arguments off a cliff. I can agree with the general idea that Lego should be for boys and girls. However, I'm sure some girls would like the style of Lego she's complaining about. I know my niece welcomes all princess and girly things, but I still got her a snap circuits kit to try to spark her curiosity in science. I also thought it was silly that this kit was only displayed when I filtered toys for boys, when I know some women who would've loved that as young girls. So I can sometimes see where she's coming from, but then she throws it all away by some of the arguments and leaps of logic she makes.

you're not wrong bro, she usually is super one-sided about everything. the thing is, whenever i watch literal criticism videos on the internet they are usually hyper-opinionated anyway. as long as they are making the basis of these biases clear i usually have no problem with it. ive got no problem with her addressing a problem she percieves and one that i think exists too even though there is little i can do about it.

I agree with your earlier point that it is very sad that her videos may push unexposed people away from egalitarian ideals and what "true" feminism is and that it also may reinforce old preconceptions of feminazi totalitarians or whatever but i think videos like these are essential in having people realize that there is more to the media than what immediately meets the eye.

I think plenty of people could benefit from being a little more actively literate and critical of what they consume

@Hunter5024 said:

@Sergio: The hitler comparison was over here. This thread kind of absorbed some of the arguments that were going on in that one.

Hey, I didn't bring that baggage over here. Animasta was doing the usual thing that he does in every thread about gender and being argumentative and contrarian. DON'T YOU PUT THAT EVIL ON ME RICKY-BOBBY!

@thedj93 said:

@Sergio said:

I think she just tends to run some of her own arguments off a cliff. I can agree with the general idea that Lego should be for boys and girls. However, I'm sure some girls would like the style of Lego she's complaining about. I know my niece welcomes all princess and girly things, but I still got her a snap circuits kit to try to spark her curiosity in science. I also thought it was silly that this kit was only displayed when I filtered toys for boys, when I know some women who would've loved that as young girls. So I can sometimes see where she's coming from, but then she throws it all away by some of the arguments and leaps of logic she makes.

you're not wrong bro, she usually is super one-sided about everything. the thing is, whenever i watch literal criticism videos on the internet they are usually hyper-opinionated anyway. as long as they are making the basis of these biases clear i usually have no problem with it. ive got no problem with her addressing a problem she percieves and one that i think exists too even though there is little i can do about it.

I agree with your earlier point that it is very sad that her videos may push unexposed people away from egalitarian ideals and what "true" feminism is and that it also may reinforce old preconceptions of feminazi totalitarians or whatever but i think videos like these are essential in having people realize that there is more to the media than what immediately meets the eye.

I think plenty of people could benefit from being a little more actively literate and critical of what they consume

The thing is that she's actually being poisonous to the term of being feminist by being a posterchild for all the bad steretypes around it.

It's disheartening how many women recoil and are admant about not being feminist cause so much of the stigma around it has been associated with the stereotype of the feminazi. By being the shrill voice of derision which any person who has a grasp on reality easily can pick apart the points of, she's making a mockery of it. Add to the fact that she personally has gone on record as saying "she feels alienated by feminism" yet choose a name like Feminist Frequency for her video series, she is actively hurting the cause she claims to be championing. It's like what Michael Moore is to liberals or Bill O'Reilly is to conservatives. She becomes a crude caricature that the uninitated may unfortunately associate with a cause.

@Sergio said:

@Animasta said:

@TeflonBilly: my argument has nothing to do with her and everything to do with you, but hey! if you feel uncomfortable about me saying you shouldn't compare people who make youtube videos to terrorist organizations then feel free to bow out.

god you must think I care about her videos much more than I do, but to be honest I barely have an interest in her new videos so whateverrrrrrrr

His initial post, which was actually made over a month ago, possibly around the time she shot up in notoriety, doesn't make such a comparison. His critique of her was perfectly valid as a topic to be discussed. Now, I didn't monitor what he might have said in other threads regarding this topic, but from this particular thread, you were the first to make the Hitler comparison, even if it was being facetious. I think his reply back wasn't serious, considering the moustache crackenwise.

#crackenwise

@TeflonBilly said:

The thing is that she's actually being poisonous to the term of being feminist by being a posterchild for all the bad steretypes around it.

It's disheartening how many women recoil and are admant about not being feminist cause so much of the stigma around it has been associated with the stereotype of the feminazi. By being the shrill voice of derision which any person who has a grasp on reality easily can pick apart the points of, she's making a mockery of it. Add to the fact that she personally has gone on record as saying "she feels alienated by feminism" yet choose a name like Feminist Frequency for her video series, she is actively hurting the cause she claims to be championing. It's like what Michael Moore is to liberals or Bill O'Reilly is to conservatives. She becomes a crude caricature that the uninitated may unfortunately associate with a cause.

but like... it's a youtube video series that nitpicks on tv shows that everybody's familiar with. it's not high art and it's not an empirical opinion that it demands everyone ascribe to. if these videos are turning people away from the whole movement of feminist egalitarianism then i don't think the blame is on the video. people shouldnt be so averse to listening to inflammatory opinions. if you aren't actively identifying and dissecting the author's bias as you read you aren't properly consuming literature. at least that's what i learned from an 11th grade media literacy class. i mean this isn't rocket science. these videos were not designed in order to make people boycott movie studios and tv networks like cbs. in my (unqualified) opinion they are best for showing people the types of questions they should be asking when they watch tv. it's better than just letting your brain rot.

fuck man i dont even know. i just watch the vids i dont let em affect me. i refuse to believe that that kind of behavior is abnormal.

when i watch a michael moore documentary i try to keep my eyes open to when he's demonstrating an interesting point by cornering some rich fat cat with impossible question and when he's just manipulating footage to say whatever he wants. it is especially important to be aware of bias when watching a documentary cause you can make the footage say almost anything if you spend enough time editing.

i guess my thesis is that the kind of people who are actually convinced by bullshit like that are going to continue being duped unless they either stop consuming media or learn to do it right, and the only way to start doing it right is to assess opinions that you disagree with without starting a friggin flamewar.

alright ill stop spazzing out now...

@thedj93: You're not spazzing at all, you're having proper discourse, something I hope we can get back to in this thread.

The thing I find so objectionable is that due to the vile reacion by the impotent hoardes of 4chan or whatever they gave Sarkeesian an out. She became a sympathetic figure and parlayed that in a sizeable amount of cash and a cadre of sheeple who are ready to wholesale swallow whatever she releases regardless of quality. That's why I worry that when if she releases something that's reminiscent of what she's released earlier, everybody is given a huge disservice, wether it's in the name of gender equillibrium in video games or plain being an informative documentary. Her work is terrible and her attitude is reprehensible.

I would just dismiss it as silly YouTube fluff if we didn't have the debacle that was KONY2012. It showed how easily disinformation and idiocy can be spread by one video being at the right place at the right time.

She already has an in with this Kickstarter project and with how easily the "video game press" loves to jump on anything remotely close to sexist lately what with the Tomb Raider comments, the Aris kerfuffle and "Girlfriend-mode" in Borderlands 2 so they can get page hits.

I never said this is a subject that shouldn't be examined. In fact I welcome it. However, Sarkeesian has been nothing, but a manipulative hack so far and I really don't see her being up to the challenge of giving it the treatment it deserves.

I could say a lot about Anita Sarkeesian, a great part of it would include some not so nice words. I could, but when it comes to people like Anita (not just the feminazis), it's simply better to ignore them and everything they have to say. Heh, who said you had to be a religious person to be a zealot? It's sad that the most extreme of feminists seem to get their word out the most.

I believe that it is not only the messenger but the message that is misguided. People targeting video games as a haven for misogyny/sexism and a place where it can be corrected are vastly misdirecting their efforts. While there are no shortage of 'sympathetic' dudes to the feminine plight on internet message boards, it simply isn't the most fertile ground for change. You can see the same sorts of problems feminists complain about in games in movies and in books, both areas where women are a much more influential demographic than in games. Hell, even books written specifically for women by women (50 shades of Gray, Twilight) contain female leads who fly in the face of what feminists would like to see.

Personally, I think the entire sexism in popular culture thing is a product of biology, not of sociology. Even if I'm wrong about that, however, focusing one's attention on games is not the way to affect change. The market demands of male consumers will probably see to that. Gamers are just an easy target because of the various negative stereotypes associated with the hobby, and I think it is also because we are aware of those stereotypes that we are sensitive to the complaints.

@thedj93 said:

@TeflonBilly said:

The thing is that she's actually being poisonous to the term of being feminist by being a posterchild for all the bad steretypes around it.

It's disheartening how many women recoil and are admant about not being feminist cause so much of the stigma around it has been associated with the stereotype of the feminazi. By being the shrill voice of derision which any person who has a grasp on reality easily can pick apart the points of, she's making a mockery of it. Add to the fact that she personally has gone on record as saying "she feels alienated by feminism" yet choose a name like Feminist Frequency for her video series, she is actively hurting the cause she claims to be championing. It's like what Michael Moore is to liberals or Bill O'Reilly is to conservatives. She becomes a crude caricature that the uninitated may unfortunately associate with a cause.

but like... it's a youtube video series that nitpicks on tv shows that everybody's familiar with. it's not high art and it's not an empirical opinion that it demands everyone ascribe to. if these videos are turning people away from the whole movement of feminist egalitarianism then i don't think the blame is on the video. people shouldnt be so averse to listening to inflammatory opinions. if you aren't actively identifying and dissecting the author's bias as you read you aren't properly consuming literature. at least that's what i learned from an 11th grade media literacy class. i mean this isn't rocket science. these videos were not designed in order to make people boycott movie studios and tv networks like cbs. in my (unqualified) opinion they are best for showing people the types of questions they should be asking when they watch tv. it's better than just letting your brain rot.

fuck man i dont even know. i just watch the vids i dont let em affect me. i refuse to believe that that kind of behavior is abnormal.

when i watch a michael moore documentary i try to keep my eyes open to when he's demonstrating an interesting point by cornering some rich fat cat with impossible question and when he's just manipulating footage to say whatever he wants. it is especially important to be aware of bias when watching a documentary cause you can make the footage say almost anything if you spend enough time editing.

i guess my thesis is that the kind of people who are actually convinced by bullshit like that are going to continue being duped unless they either stop consuming media or learn to do it right, and the only way to start doing it right is to assess opinions that you disagree with without starting a friggin flamewar.

alright ill stop spazzing out now...

I absolutely think you make valid points! I think people like Anita SHOULD exist so we have an opportunity to hear her opinion as much as anyone else, no matter how ridiculous I think it may be. But when she gathers $150k in funds on her own, people begin to pay a lot more attention to you. $150k is basically the community telling you that you have something special and deserve to be held up high over a number of other speakers. So it does scare me a little that she has now been given a larger pedestal.

@TheDudeOfGaming said:

I could say a lot about Anita Sarkeesian, a great part of it would include some not so nice words. I could, but when it comes to people like Anita (not just the feminazis), it's simply better to ignore them and everything they have to say. Heh, who said you had to be a religious person to be a zealot? It's sad that the most extreme of feminists seem to get their word out the most.

I don't exactly agree with Anita's brand of feminism as it seems less to do with actual equality and more to do with some form of absurd behavioral expectation but I do think language like you used in this post does actually help her more than it hurts. Terms like "feminazi" and "zealot" attack the character and not the point they're trying to make which ultimately makes you look worse.

On the flip side of that point I think if women want to be escalated to the level of men in society they have to be willing to be treated as equals too. This is precisely where Anita and I seem to disagree. I don't think people should not be offended, I think art could stand to be more offensive for the sake of creating meaningful dialog. I don't want the industry to stop putting out the products they do, I want more products made by a more diverse group of people to create a more diverse gaming culture. I don't think the use of art to depict a male power trip fantasy is inherently bad, it's just escapism that should be viewed as such - and if you can't appreciate it there's nothing forcing you to be a consumer. The opposite is true too, if we had female power trip fantasies that degraded men in video game form, while it wouldn't be a product for me, I'd actually be glad that it exists since at the very least it'd mean the creator wasn't afraid of expressing something taboo.

@A_Talking_Donkey said:

@TheDudeOfGaming said:

I could say a lot about Anita Sarkeesian, a great part of it would include some not so nice words. I could, but when it comes to people like Anita (not just the feminazis), it's simply better to ignore them and everything they have to say. Heh, who said you had to be a religious person to be a zealot? It's sad that the most extreme of feminists seem to get their word out the most.

I don't exactly agree with Anita's brand of feminism as it seems less to do with actual equality and more to do with some form of absurd behavioral expectation but I do think language like you used in this post does actually help her more than it hurts. Terms like "feminazi" and "zealot" attack the character and not the point they're trying to make which ultimately makes you look worse.

On the flip side of that point I think if women want to be escalated to the level of men in society they have to be willing to be treated as equals too. This is precisely where Anita and I seem to disagree. I don't think people should not be offended, I think art could stand to be more offensive for the sake of creating meaningful dialog. I don't want the industry to stop putting out the products they do, I want more products made by a more diverse group of people to create a more diverse gaming culture. I don't think the use of art to depict a male power trip fantasy is inherently bad, it's just escapism that should be viewed as such - and if you can't appreciate it there's nothing forcing you to be a consumer. The opposite is true too, if we had female power trip fantasies that degraded men in video game form, while it wouldn't be a product for me, I'd actually be glad that it exists since at the very least it'd mean the creator wasn't afraid of expressing something taboo.

Have I told you I love you today? This is perfect. I couldn't have said it better. And speaking of...

I'm actually working on a game now that tries to objectify the MALE character for female titillation, and boy it's surprisingly difficult. What would that game entail? It's turned into a kind of gay romance with scantily clad men, making it more a big gay joke than I expected. I've asked a number of female friends how they would like their "boy-toys" in a game, and "supple gay-boy" seemed to be popular. Thoughts?

Vid makes a good point.

@verysexypotato: Yeah, when you get down to it, objectifying a male character nowadays seems to dip into the "bishie" and even "yaoi" parts of Japanese culture. The beefcake Tom Of Finland objectification of men seems to be predominantly adopted by the gay culture. Hell, even contemporary sex symbols of the screen and stage go for the "supple twink" look of a Edward Cullen or Justin Bieber.

And the $150,000 Kickstarter is as I said earlier a big reason why one shouldn't as easily brush this off as YouTube fluff as her earlier work could easily be done if you disagree with her. There are expectations which she seem ill-equipped to meet that have been made now.

And again, dismissing something as just a silly YouTube video really is irresponsible in a post KONY2012 debacle world.

@verysexypotato: Then again, if you want a some inspiration for objectifying men into what acts as desireable, have a look at the WWE.

Each wrestler is a polished product meant to sell, and when you predominantly appear in hi-def wearing nothing but a speedo while oiled up and selling a character who the WWE is desperately trying ensnare women to swoon for as well, then you see there's quite a bevvy of archetypes to choose from.

Take John Cena for example, personally I think he seems like a bulbous gorilla, but he has a huge fanbase who love his chiseled all American chin as well as his overtly muscular body.

John Morrison, who unfortunately isn't with the company anymore, had abs you could shred cheese on and the sultry looks of the sex symbol in his day Jim Morrison from The Doors. He also had extravagent ring attire which accentuated his whole rock star persona. Maria Kanellis, a former Diva of WWE, said that WWE are missing a goldmine by not trying to get a guy like him on the cover of any women's magazine for some interview as he would fetch a gal's eye in an instant on the newstand and would be a perfect gateway for more female fans to give the show a shot.

CM Punk has a huge cadre of female fans despite his grungy look and tattoo covered body. He's a fit bad boy and has features which more than resemble Christian Bale.

Jeff Hardy and to a lesser extent his brother Matt has hordes of fangirls who shriek for his eccentric and colorful style.

@verysexypotato: Have you looked at Otome games? This is basically what they are. One female protagonist, lots of boys who are distant, unaggressive, and emotionally troubled, and exactly zero threat of any of them hooking up with another girl.

@sodacat said:

@verysexypotato: Have you looked at Otome games? This is basically what they are. One female protagonist, lots of boys who are distant, unaggressive, and emotionally troubled, and exactly zero threat of any of them hooking up with another girl.

@TeflonBilly said:

@verysexypotato: Then again, if you want a some inspiration for objectifying men into what acts as desireable, have a look at the WWE.

Each wrestler is a polished product meant to sell, and when you predominantly appear in hi-def wearing nothing but a speedo while oiled up and selling a character who the WWE is desperately trying ensnare women to swoon for as well, then you see there's quite a bevvy of archetypes to choose from.

Take John Cena for example, personally I think he seems like a bulbous gorilla, but he has a huge fanbase who love his chiseled all American chin as well as his overtly muscular body.

John Morrison, who unfortunately isn't with the company anymore, had abs you could shred cheese on and the sultry looks of the sex symbol in his day Jim Morrison from The Doors. He also had extravagent ring attire which accentuated his whole rock star persona. Maria Kanellis, a former Diva of WWE, said that WWE are missing a goldmine by not trying to get a guy like him on the cover of any women's magazine for some interview as he would fetch a gal's eye in an instant on the newstand and would be a perfect gateway for more female fans to give the show a shot.

CM Punk has a huge cadre of female fans despite his grungy look and tattoo covered body. He's a fit bad boy and has features which more than resemble Christian Bale.

Jeff Hardy and to a lesser extent his brother Matt has hordes of fangirls who shriek for his eccentric and colorful style.

Oh my goodness, what a goldmine! Thanks fellas. This will be put to good use.

@TeflonBilly said:

@Animasta said:

@Napalm: that was before she did the whole kickstarter thing though, right? I mean if it wasn't then the point I was making that her videos weren't out yet would've been false and I'm sure OP would've LOVED to prove me wrong. It also depends on how much she played and how well constructed the argument was.

I mean that final dancing scene was fairly sexist even if I do think it wasn't on the whole.

Here you go, this is what we can look foward to.

Man did she even play the fucking game?

@AlexW00d: Of course! Don't you remember the part where Bayonetta is a single mom... TO HERSELF?!

OH WAIT!