Feminism versus FACTS (RE Damsel in distress) - General

[QUOTE=Shadaez;39928443]Why are you being so emotional about it?[/QUOTE] I'm not.

"when you have just 7 seconds to explain the storyline, of course the characters will be very one dimensional" so true, same thing with halo really, ship is under attack, cortana is it's brain, aliens possessing ship's brain = bad, so master chief taking ships brain away from aliens = good then we run into a whole mess of aliens on a giant ring, halo 1's first level only really had the one cutscene to explain the entire backstory, it wasn't till the books came out later that they filled it in with some plot behind that, then the later games elaborated on it

[QUOTE=.Isak.;39928407]Christ, people. The issue with apparent misogyny in video games is not because some illuminati-esque organization of tall men in suit sitting around a table decided to say "Let's make Mario save a princess again." It's because that's the story of Mario. Games like Mario and Double Dragon are continuing series of arcade games where the entire story is a trope. The first games were arcades and had limited storage space. People didn't play arcade games for stories, they played them because they were fun. Throwing a story on it was neat, but you aren't paying quarters to watch a pixel-y movie. A seven-second tool for showing the motivation behind the story is normal. Now, these series continued into the modern age and kept the tropes because those tropes defined the stories. Mario's entire storyline is, and always has been, a damsel in distress trope. It's a staple of the series, much like Mario's color scheme and the existence of koopas. That's all it is, that's all that's necessary. Double Dragon is much the same. [/quote] No one said any different. [QUOTE=.Isak.;39928407] Reading too much into things causes you to come up with issues that do not exist. That's the foundation of anxiety - reading too much into the future. It's not a healthy thing to do with your mind, and it's not a healthy thing to do with social commentary. [/quote] But it does exist, the videos she's making are real and are all based on fact. I get that you can't see it, though. [QUOTE=.Isak.;39928407] Anita Sarkeesian is a cash-out who creates poor-quality social commentary videos. She's nothing more. The only reason she's remotely famous is because of the oppression olympics of feminism. the Patriarchy doesn't exist, just like the Illuminati doesn't exist. There's nobody dictating what video games and movies should have sexism and which should be forward-thinking. [/quote] I don't get why you're letting your emotions cloud your judgement like this, the Patriarchy is completely logical. Women deal with a LOT of things you don't have to. Shit like cat-calling. You've never had to experience that, it's really infuriating that women have to [i]expect[/i] this harassment daily. [QUOTE=.Isak.;39928407] The thing that frustrates me about Sarkeesian is that she will not define a realistic expectation of a woman. If they're too strong (e.g. her thesis), they're just men being masqueraded as women. If they're too weak (e.g. Damsel in Distress), they're a poor representation of women. Of course they're a poor representation, it's a goddamn arcade game. Sarkeesian doesn't want women to be like men, but she doesn't want women to be like women either. If you want neither masculine or feminine women, or anything in between, of course you'll invent problems. [/quote] She's going to do a show about the strong female characters later. And I think you're misunderstanding her thesis, and what the "woman that's a man' trope is. Women face a different set of challenges than men, and if you just write a women the same way you write a man you ignore that. The characters falling under the trope aren't necessarily bad, though. [QUOTE=.Isak.;39928407] Society dictates men to fit into a section of tropes, just like women. You've got the Homer Simpsons and the Gears of War folks. There's honestly not a whole lot of variation in men in games either. Like I said in some previous threads, video games are a brand new storytelling medium and art form that still needs to mature. Well-written movies don't tend to have sexism in them. Well-written games cannot compare to well-written movies - yet. Feminists have a tendency to read far too much into simple things like tropes, and social commentaries simply expand this delusion that men are actively trying to oppress women. Tropes are not an issue of sexism, they're an issue of lazy writing. The reason that apparently "negative" tropes seem to be rife in video games are because it's a male-dominated profession with a (previously) male-dominated market.[/quote] Men aren't shown negatively, though, and no one is saying that the developers are purposely doing this, she is simply saying it's a problem that they do. Intent isn't magic in that way, though it does soften the blow. [QUOTE=.Isak.;39928407] If you REALLY want to change the use of tropes in video games, don't make bad social commentaries with the $140,000 you made from a kickstarter. Make video games that don't follow those tropes. Yelling about injustices will not solve them - action is necessary for change.[/QUOTE] One new game isn't going to change the industry. There's plenty of good games out there, but that doesn't mean the bad ones don't exist.

[QUOTE=.Isak.;39928407]Christ, people. The issue with apparent misogyny in video games is not because some illuminati-esque organization of tall men in suit sitting around a table decided to say "Let's make Mario save a princess again." It's because that's the story of Mario. Games like Mario and Double Dragon are continuing series of arcade games where the entire story is a trope. The first games were arcades and had limited storage space. People didn't play arcade games for stories, they played them because they were fun. Throwing a story on it was neat, but you aren't paying quarters to watch a pixel-y movie. A seven-second tool for showing the motivation behind the story is normal. Now, these series continued into the modern age and kept the tropes because those tropes defined the stories. Mario's entire storyline is, and always has been, a damsel in distress trope. It's a staple of the series, much like Mario's color scheme and the existence of koopas. That's all it is, that's all that's necessary. Double Dragon is much the same. Reading too much into things causes you to come up with issues that do not exist. That's the foundation of anxiety - reading too much into the future. It's not a healthy thing to do with your mind, and it's not a healthy thing to do with social commentary. Anita Sarkeesian is a cash-out who creates poor-quality social commentary videos. She's nothing more. The only reason she's remotely famous is because of the oppression olympics of feminism. the Patriarchy doesn't exist, just like the Illuminati doesn't exist. There's nobody dictating what video games and movies should have sexism and which should be forward-thinking. The thing that frustrates me about Sarkeesian is that she will not define a realistic expectation of a woman. If they're too strong (e.g. her thesis), they're just men being masqueraded as women. If they're too weak (e.g. Damsel in Distress), they're a poor representation of women. Of course they're a poor representation, it's a goddamn arcade game. Sarkeesian doesn't want women to be like men, but she doesn't want women to be like women either. If you want neither masculine or feminine women, or anything in between, of course you'll invent problems. Society dictates men to fit into a section of tropes, just like women. You've got the Homer Simpsons and the Gears of War folks. There's honestly not a whole lot of variation in men in games either. Like I said in some previous threads, video games are a brand new storytelling medium and art form that still needs to mature. Well-written movies don't tend to have sexism in them. Well-written games cannot compare to well-written movies - yet. Feminists have a tendency to read far too much into simple things like tropes, and social commentaries simply expand this delusion that men are actively trying to oppress women. Tropes are not an issue of sexism, they're an issue of lazy writing. The reason that apparently "negative" tropes seem to be rife in video games are because it's a male-dominated profession with a (previously) male-dominated market. If you REALLY want to change the use of tropes in video games, don't make bad social commentaries with the $140,000 you made from a kickstarter. Make video games that don't follow those tropes. Yelling about injustices will not solve them - action is necessary for change.[/QUOTE] We've gone over this. 7 seconds or 2 hours, they could still choose something different. TMNT:Turtles In Time, the evil guy stole the Statue of Liberty and that was enough to go on a crusade to fuck-shit-up™. Now, I'm not saying what they did with Mario or DD is bad or is unforgivable. The point is that it started a trend in games (which was already a thing in other mediums) instead of trying something new. That is basically her whole point. I can't really say about the realistic portrayal of woman as I haven't read her thesis yet, but what I will say is that the video pretty much could be a considered a complaint about the current games storytelling. It's just she never said that in the video, but it could be implied that is what she could be meaning, even though maybe she doesn't even realize it. I don't think she's in a good position to lead a development of a game. She's a sort-of known figure in the media now and she uses that to bring attention to this issue. I think it's a better use of resources than her making an actual game. Let people do what they do good. (Not really implying that she's the best for the job, but she's the one that did it.)

[QUOTE=thisispain;39928444]strawman, false equivalence, prob a whole bunch of more fallacies [editline]15th March 2013[/editline] whats it to you bud[/QUOTE] Aaand there's the fallacy fallacy. Just because my argument has some fallacies doesn't mean it's wrong. And Shadaez, thanks for actually addressing my comments rather than dismissing them on the grounds of logical fallacies. After looking up feminist concepts of the patriarchy, I understand it better. I've always been led to assume that it's some illuminati-esque organization of men systematically oppressing women, but I see now that it's simply a term to describe a male-centric/patriarchal society. I think the term makes it sound ridiculously imposing rather than just saying "patriarchal society," but I'm glad to know the difference now. And as for the point that men aren't shown negatively, sure they are. I'll leave video games and hop over to The Simpsons - Homer Simpson is a great example of a negatively-represented male. Aggressive, stupid, and even abusive, with very few redeeming traits other than idiotic antics. Tropes are not one-sided, and cherry-picking badly-written female characters while ignoring badly-written male characters is unhelpful. The issue that Anita Sarkeesian is tackling isn't sexism at all. It's shitty characters. It's poor writing. It's not sexism, it's writing - she's just focusing on the women's side of it. There are very very few strong characters in video games - either male or female. Chell doesn't even talk, and neither does Gordon. Both manage to be -okay- characters. Video games typically don't require a lot of talking. Alyx, for example, is a great character. She's strong and independent and rescues Gordon several times. Valve games have a tendency to be well-written, and you see hardly a smidgen of sexism in them. Shitty writers incorporate tropes, and those tropes lean to the sexist-against-women side because of the male-dominated background of video games. They're continued because of tradition. There's examples of games, like Mario, incorporating stronger female characters and shedding their weakly-portrayed nature, like the video's Super Princess Peach. Sure, it was a bad game, but people are actively trying to create strong female characters and that's absolutely a good thing. As writing in video games improves and it grows as an artistic medium, we'll see stronger characters of both genders. There will be shitty games forever, and there will be games that portray women badly. The good news is that it's growing out of that.

Sometimes I feel bad about being a little bit sexist sometimes, then I think to myself no one cares. Then threads like this show up and I realize, EVERYONE CARES.

Feminists are dumb. gg

[QUOTE=FeartheMango;39928735]Sometimes I feel bad about being a little bit sexist sometimes, then I think to myself no one cares. Then threads like this show up and I realize, EVERYONE CARES.[/QUOTE] Everyone can do sexist things from time to time, it's really good that you acknowledge what you're doing is sexist. Acknowledging it is a major step in combating it.

[QUOTE=.Isak.;39928614]Aaand there's the fallacy fallacy. Just because my argument has some fallacies doesn't mean it's wrong. And Shadaez, thanks for actually addressing my comments rather than dismissing them on the grounds of logical fallacies. [/QUOTE] hey bud i wasnt dismissing them, i was pointing it out for shadaez

The funny thing is all of the other opinions OP holds you rightist shill.

[QUOTE=DoctorRictofen;39928741]Feminists are dumb. gg[/QUOTE] as a feminist i find this a little offensive (but not really because you're a dude on the internet that is probably either making a joke or doesn't know any different) however as a feminist i also find anita sarkeesian offensive. because she's extremely uneducated and her information is presented in an extremely manipulative way. moral of the story, you should probably learn your feminists.

The Op's video reminded me of this video: [video=youtube;4JA4EPRbWhQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JA4EPRbWhQ#![/video]

Oh dear

[QUOTE=yawmwen;39928177]so if there is a tv show that shows blatantly racist shit, there is absolutely no problem because you don't have to watch it?[/QUOTE] Yeah, pretty much, a shows already like that, its called South Park, blatantly offensive to everyone, hell they shit on jews non stop, every episode pretty much. Wanna know why people like it so much and its so successful? Because people want to have a good laugh and know its just a fucking show and dont let it bother them day after day like its some sort of threat. Same reason why people love games. No form of media should be censored or pandering to anyone, you can just ignore it. Theres a big difference of practicing racisim in day to day life, and writing it into a show/movie/game. Pull the stick out of your ass and stop getting so offended over entertainment, the only people it affects are hysterics who let meaningless shit bother them. I bet you no one gave a fuck about this retarded damsel in distress bullshit until Anita got big, because I sure as hell never heard of it being an issue until now.

[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;39929512]Yeah, pretty much, a shows already like that, its called South Park, blatantly offensive to everyone, hell they shit on jews non stop, every episode pretty much..[/QUOTE] south park also tackles some problematic things (though it also does some bad things like saying faggot now means annoying person or whatever), and the really bad characters are supposed to be hated, but we're talking about games so can we just stop this? [editline]15th March 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=.Isak.;39928614]And as for the point that men aren't shown negatively, sure they are. I'll leave video games and hop over to The Simpsons - Homer Simpson is a great example of a negatively-represented male. Aggressive, stupid, and even abusive, with very few redeeming traits other than idiotic antics. Tropes are not one-sided, and cherry-picking badly-written female characters while ignoring badly-written male characters is unhelpful. The issue that Anita Sarkeesian is tackling isn't sexism at all. It's shitty characters. It's poor writing. It's not sexism, it's writing - she's just focusing on the women's side of it. There are very very few strong characters in video games - either male or female. Chell doesn't even talk, and neither does Gordon. Both manage to be -okay- characters. Video games typically don't require a lot of talking. Alyx, for example, is a great character. She's strong and independent and rescues Gordon several times. Valve games have a tendency to be well-written, and you see hardly a smidgen of sexism in them. Shitty writers incorporate tropes, and those tropes lean to the sexist-against-women side because of the male-dominated background of video games. They're continued because of tradition. There's examples of games, like Mario, incorporating stronger female characters and shedding their weakly-portrayed nature, like the video's Super Princess Peach. Sure, it was a bad game, but people are actively trying to create strong female characters and that's absolutely a good thing. As writing in video games improves and it grows as an artistic medium, we'll see stronger characters of both genders. There will be shitty games forever, and there will be games that portray women badly. The good news is that it's growing out of that.[/QUOTE] We're talking about in general, media in general negatively portrays women, in general men are shown positively or are both the antagonist and protagonist which cancels eachother out. Male is the default. Also don't get why you think it's so bad for Anita to cherry-pick when you're doing the same thing to find the bad male characters. Anita isn't even cherry picking, pick a female character in a game at random and it'll be a poor female character [editline]15th March 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=HoodedSniper;39929512] I bet you no one gave a fuck about this retarded damsel in distress bullshit until Anita got big, because I sure as hell never heard of it being an issue until now.[/QUOTE] I've always cared about sexism in games, she's just picking the major tropes and talking about them. You can't deny that the Damsel in Distress isn't a huge part of video game history. It would be wrong to ignore it, even though it's not so relevant today.

[QUOTE=Shadaez;39929642] We're talking about in general, media in general negatively portrays women, in general men are shown positively or are both the antagonist and protagonist which cancels eachother out. Male is the default. Also don't get why you think it's so bad for Anita to cherry-pick when you're doing the same thing to find the bad male characters. Anita isn't even cherry picking, pick a female character in a game at random and it'll be a poor female character[/QUOTE] Faith? Faith is a poor female character?

[QUOTE=Shadaez;39929642]south park also tackles some problematic things (though it also does some bad things like saying faggot now means annoying person or whatever), and the really bad characters are supposed to be hated, but we're talking about games so can we just stop this? [editline]15th March 2013[/editline] We're talking about in general, media in general negatively portrays women, in general men are shown positively or are both the antagonist and protagonist which cancels eachother out. Male is the default. Also don't get why you think it's so bad for Anita to cherry-pick when you're doing the same thing to find the bad male characters. Anita isn't even cherry picking, pick a female character in a game at random and it'll be a poor female character [editline]15th March 2013[/editline] I've always cared about sexism in games, she's just picking the major tropes and talking about them. You can't deny that the Damsel in Distress isn't a huge part of video game history. It would be wrong to ignore it, even though it's not so relevant today.[/QUOTE] Confirmed for not even reading this thread. We were actually talking about TV and I was answering a question. Also cant believe you just said this "pick a female character in a game at random and it'll be a poor female character" Whatever, its useless arguing with you.

[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;39929751]Confirmed for not even reading this thread. We were actually talking about TV and I was answering a question.[/quote] I know, I meant in general the thread's about Anita Skareizjeijzn who made a vid about games [QUOTE=HoodedSniper;39929751] Also cant believe you just said this "pick a female character in a game at random and it'll be a poor female character" Whatever, its useless arguing with you.[/QUOTE] why is that bad [editline]15th March 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=MadPro119;39929748]Faith? Faith is a poor female character?[/QUOTE] did you randomly pick that character because I highly doubt it, if so, how?

[QUOTE=Shadaez;39929762][QUOTE=HoodedSniper;39929751]Confirmed for not even reading this thread. We were actually talking about TV and I was answering a question. I know, I meant in general the thread's about Anita Skareizjeijzn who made a vid about games why is that bad [editline]15th March 2013[/editline] did you randomly pick that character because I highly doubt it, if so, how?[/QUOTE] Well first, what do you mean by a poor female character? Faith is strong (Something Anita says is reserved for men), has a pretty good back story and motivation, is able to accomplish so much on her own.

I never said Faith was a bad character, she's pretty great. I think Mirror's Edge is pretty critically acclaimed. Sure, she probably has flaws, but I don't know much about her. [editline]15th March 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=MadPro119;39929778]Faith is strong (Something Anita says is reserved for men).[/QUOTE] also she never said this, you're completely misunderstanding things she said society says strength is a positive masculine trait

Im confused you just said pick a character, she will be poor. I did.

Patiently waiting for the shit-storm to end. And it doesn't look too good. [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/rN00bF1.gif[/IMG]

[QUOTE=MadPro119;39929801]Im confused you just said pick a character, she will be poor.[/QUOTE] At random. I'm saying that a HUGE majority of female characters are negative portrayals. If you had a list of every woman character with a name and somewhat important role in a game, and you picked one at random, it would be very unlikely for it not to be a bad one. [editline]15th March 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Doc_72;39929813][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/rN00bF1.gif[/IMG] Patiently waiting for the shit-storm to end.[/QUOTE] you don't have to read the thread

[QUOTE=Shadaez;39929788]I never said Faith was a bad character, she's pretty great. I think Mirror's Edge is pretty critically acclaimed. Sure, she probably has flaws, but I don't know much about her. [editline]15th March 2013[/editline] also she never said this, you're completely misunderstanding things she said society says strength is a positive masculine[/QUOTE] Dude you just said "pick a female character in a game at random and it'll be a poor female character" You just straight up implied all female characters are terrible in games. Its like you just impulsively spew whatever retarded thought comes to mind. Do you even play video games or give a fuck about them or are you just taking sides without any reason on why. Because you have shown you have not a single clue on what you say.

[QUOTE=MadPro119;39929778] Well first, what do you mean by a poor female character? Faith is strong (Something Anita says is reserved for men), has a pretty good back story and motivation, is able to accomplish so much on her own.[/QUOTE] I don't believe it was ever Anita's point that good female characters don't exist. Rather, her point was that most female characters are given the same weak roles. The point of that damsel in distress video was to point out one specific trope. Why that trope can be degrading, and its pervasiveness in video games so much that the damsel in distress trope ends up being a default choice for video game goals.

[QUOTE=Doc_72;39929409]The Op's video reminded me of this video: [video=youtube;4JA4EPRbWhQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JA4EPRbWhQ#![/video][/QUOTE] TAA is seriously a bad person

[QUOTE=Shadaez;39929788]I never said Faith was a bad character, she's pretty great. I think Mirror's Edge is pretty critically acclaimed. Sure, she probably has flaws, but I don't know much about her. [editline]15th March 2013[/editline] also she never said this, you're completely misunderstanding things she said [b]society says strength is a positive masculine trait[/b][/QUOTE] You sure because it says... [b]Table 3: Values for a More Feminist Television Landscape[/b]

[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;39929820]Dude you just said "pick a female character in a game at random and it'll be a poor female character" You just straight up implied all female characters are terrible in games. Its like you just impulsively spew whatever retarded thought comes to mind. Do you even play video games or give a fuck about them or are you just taking sides without any reason on why. Because you have shown you have not a single clue on what you say.[/QUOTE] Would you please stop taking things out of context, it's clear what I meant. I don't know what you're trying to accomplish by saying I don't play games and attacking me personally, but it's not making you look any better.

[QUOTE=Shadaez;39929815]At random. I'm saying that a HUGE majority of female characters are negative portrayals. If you had a list of every woman character with a name and somewhat important role in a game, and you picked one at random, it would be very unlikely for it not to be a bad one. [editline]15th March 2013[/editline] you don't have to read the thread[/QUOTE] What are some negative female characters? [editline]16th March 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Valnar;39929824]I don't believe it was ever Anita's point that good female characters don't exist. Rather, her point was that most female characters are given the same weak roles. The point of that damsel in distress video was to point out one specific trope. Why that trope can be degrading, and its pervasiveness in video games so much that the damsel in distress trope ends up being a default choice for video game goals.[/QUOTE] Yes, but this video explains why it isn't degrading, and isn't a problem.

[QUOTE=Doc_72;39929409]The Op's video reminded me of this video: [video=youtube;4JA4EPRbWhQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JA4EPRbWhQ#![/video][/QUOTE] Oh boy, here we go.