Cliff Bleszinkski responds to 'Tropes vs. Women' furor
215 replies, posted
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;39887805]interpreted by some psycho, man hating, new age feminazis.[/QUOTE]
Off to a brilliant start FlakAttack.
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;39887805]Also the pay gap studies in the western world are bullshit. Once you adjust for factors like danger, distance from civilization, and other things, the difference shrinks to a fraction of the 74 cents to a dollar or whatever crap they claim.[/QUOTE]
Can you explain away this with danger and distance from civilization?
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-21698522[/url]
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;39887805]Women have some problems even in the modern world, but to claim that there is some oppressive patriarchy pushing women down is a god damn joke. I have seen 2 studies so far showing that in the workplace, other women are far more likely to be the obstacle women face than men. You can observe the same things in schools with women's social groups. As for the media portrayal of women, that has been changing a lot. Even shit-tier sitcoms present a large range of body types and personalities than ever before, including women as the head of the household.[/QUOTE]
I don't see why you'd think women to be immune to perpetuating social misogyny. It negatively affects both men and women. And that fact that you'd use 'shit-tier sitcoms' as some apologistism is hardly telling.
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;39887805]Also, Anita Sarkeesian. I have commented on her a lot before and don't feel like doing it again. All I can say is I urge you to read her study that got her a degree. It's fucking trash. I have no idea how she made it through university with shit like that.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem[/url]
What ever the person has done before really doesn't detract from the validity of any current points in a separate argument.
Anyway, you'd be hard pressed to find any degree level study that wasn't trash.
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;39887805]Oh here we go, someone busts out "Rape Culture" again. The whole theory is based on flawed (and sometimes even "fixed") information, interpreted by some psycho, man hating, new age feminazis. What could go wrong there?
[/QUOTE]
i mean, it's not like it's completely acceptable for men to get women so drunk they don't know what they're doing and then have sex with them. yeah, that never happens, and when it does, the men are totally punished for it, both socially and legally.
totally...
[QUOTE=sp00ks;39887961]and when it does, the men are totally punished for it,[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-north-west-wales-20732156"]What a world we live in[/URL].
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;39887805]Oh here we go, someone busts out "Rape Culture" again. The whole theory is based on flawed (and sometimes even "fixed") information, interpreted by some psycho, man hating, new age feminazis. What could go wrong there?
Also the pay gap studies in the western world are bullshit. Once you adjust for factors like danger, distance from civilization, and other things, the difference shrinks to a fraction of the 74 cents to a dollar or whatever crap they claim.
Women have some problems even in the modern world, but to claim that there is some oppressive patriarchy pushing women down is a god damn joke. I have seen 2 studies so far showing that in the workplace, other women are far more likely to be the obstacle women face than men. You can observe the same things in schools with women's social groups. As for the media portrayal of women, that has been changing a lot. Even shit-tier sitcoms present a large range of body types and personalities than ever before, including women as the head of the household. Literature adopted this ages before. I don't imagine it will take much longer for video games to adjust.
Also, Anita Sarkeesian. I have commented on her a lot before and don't feel like doing it again. All I can say is I urge you to read her study that got her a degree. It's fucking trash. I have no idea how she made it through university with shit like that.[/QUOTE]
Your post does not warrant a response. I will make one anyway.
Femnazi's and man haters? Seriously? This is the year 2013, can we stop shaming feminists who make men uncomfortable with their message? There is no such thing as a large base of "radical feminists". Some exist, and the only reason they suck is not that they are too radical in their feminism, but that they do not sometimes include women of color or transgender people.
Also, pay gaps are universally known to be a phenomenon in western countries, I do not see where you are getting any info saying that the pay gap is fake. Sounds suspicious to be honest with you.
As for the existence of the patriarchy, refer to my first post in this thread. And for Rape Culture, it is essentially the same thing as the patriarchy, in which men have disproportionate power over women in today's society, including over their bodies. We have a culture in which women are too ashamed to say that they were attacked, and that people say they were "asking for it". We have MRA's threatening Anita with rape instead of just disagreeing with her. Rape culture exists if you look around, or socialize with women enough to know one who has been raped, or simply gotten their asses grabbed in the subway, and then blamed for "making a scene" out of it.
Also, I expect video games to adjust much faster than other traditional forms of media. Video games are already way ahead of most mainstream movies, though behind tv shows and books, still.
Also, I am sure you hate whatever paper she wrote because it talks about the patriarchy and rape culture in a way I wish I could (that is to say, with plenty of proper sources and a bibliography, etc).
[editline]12th March 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Ray-The-Sun;39887999][URL="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-north-west-wales-20732156"]What a world we live in[/URL].[/QUOTE]
Wow yeah 6 years totally a good amount of years for that. Also, notice how the article sets up all the information someone would need to say that she "was asking for it" with her behavior, by going into detail about how naive and drunk she was. It's language like that that denotes what kind of society we live in, even though I am sure the author did not have any bad intentions.
[editline]12th March 2013[/editline]
Have you noticed that women always "get raped"? Why do we not say "someone rapes woman" like this article does? It's not very common.
[QUOTE=person11;39887616]Also, everyone knows that rape is wrong[/QUOTE]
I don't think that's wholly true since there's even a debate about what constitutes rape. Some people honestly believe that getting a girl completely smashed and then having sex with her when she otherwise wouldn't is completely fine.
but anitas a shithead who basically ran off with 145k more then she even wanted
[editline]12th March 2013[/editline]
then took months to make 1 video
[QUOTE=Muthenfrucheir;39888777]but anitas a shithead who basically ran off with 145k more then she even wanted
[editline]12th March 2013[/editline]
then took months to make 1 video[/QUOTE]
See this is where I have a problem, I'm not nearly as bothered by the actual videos as much as I am by the fact she failed to adhere to her kickstarter promises despite being woefully overfunded.
[QUOTE=Muthenfrucheir;39888777]but anitas a shithead who basically ran off with 145k more then she even wanted
[editline]12th March 2013[/editline]
then took months to make 1 video[/QUOTE]
So literally like every kickstarter project?
[QUOTE=person11;39888397]Femnazi's and man haters? Seriously? This is the year 2013, can we stop shaming feminists who make men uncomfortable with their message? There is no such thing as a large base of "radical feminists". Some exist, and the only reason they suck is not that they are too radical in their feminism, but that they do not sometimes include women of color or transgender people.[/QUOTE]
There are two types of feminists today. Plenty of them are reasonable. Some of them think thinks like Rape Culture are a real thing. But maybe where you live, it is. Here in Quebec, education on everything from slut shaming to pay grades to the definition of rape begins as early as grade 6. Kids are 11-12 when they are taught these things in the public education system.
[QUOTE=person11;39888397]As for the existence of the patriarchy, refer to my first post in this thread. And for Rape Culture, it is essentially the same thing as the patriarchy, in which men have disproportionate power over women in today's society, including over their bodies. We have a culture in which women are too ashamed to say that they were attacked, and that people say they were "asking for it". We have MRA's threatening Anita with rape instead of just disagreeing with her. Rape culture exists if you look around, or socialize with women enough to know one who has been raped, or simply gotten their asses grabbed in the subway, and then blamed for "making a scene" out of it.[/QUOTE]
Some women getting raped does not mean we have a rape culture, just as much as some people getting killed does not mean we have a culture of murder. Rape is a serious problem, MRAs can be just as insane as feminists, and nobody ever "asks for it". All obvious stuff really. As for the response to Anita Sarkeesian, she was hoping for it. She has a bachelor's degree in Communications Studies, she knew exactly where and how to provoke the (still incredibly retarded) response she got, and then used it to boost her fame. Not going to apologize for these idiots, but she played everyone like a PR person would.
[QUOTE=person11;39888397]Also, I am sure you hate whatever paper she wrote because it talks about the patriarchy and rape culture in a way I wish I could (that is to say, with plenty of proper sources and a bibliography, etc).[/QUOTE]
The study is called [I]I’ll Make a Man Out of You: Strong Women in Science Fiction and Fantasy Television[/I], and I highly encourage you to read it, because it shows how skewed her view of reality really is. Considering that representations of men and women in a form of media is both the topic of her master's thesis and her current videos, this is definitely not an Ad Hominem attack as Nodachi thinks it is. By the way, ever since it was first publicly criticized, she has removed the paper from her webiste and any references to it. I wonder why?
[QUOTE=person11;39888397]Have you noticed that women always "get raped"? Why do we not say "someone rapes woman" like this article does? It's not very common.[/QUOTE]
People "get killed" or "get murdered". They "get hit by a drunk driver". That's just the way it is said.
[QUOTE=sp00ks;39887961]i mean, it's not like it's completely acceptable for men to get women so drunk they don't know what they're doing and then have sex with them. yeah, that never happens, and when it does, the men are totally punished for it, both socially and legally.
totally...[/QUOTE]
You think people think it's completely acceptable? You're going to need to back that statement up.
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;39888884]The study is called [I]I’ll Make a Man Out of You: Strong Women in Science Fiction and Fantasy Television[/I], and I highly encourage you to read it, because it shows how skewed her view of reality really is. Considering that representations of men and women in a form of media is both the topic of her master's thesis and her current videos, this is definitely not an Ad Hominem attack as Nodachi thinks it is. By the way, ever since it was first publicly criticized, she has removed the paper from her webiste and any references to it. I wonder why?[/QUOTE]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Guilt_by_association[/url]
Also, the study is 'Not Found'.
But there is nothing wrong with the abstract provided.
[QUOTE=Muthenfrucheir;39888777]but anitas a shithead who basically ran off with 145k more then she even wanted
[editline]12th March 2013[/editline]
then took months to make 1 video[/QUOTE]
Did she run off or did she make a video?
For those who are wondering how she got a masters degree. She went to York University, which is easy as piss to get in. I would know because I was offered an invite with an 80 average (which is barely an A in Canada).
[QUOTE=person11;39888397]Your post does not warrant a response. I will make one anyway.
Femnazi's and man haters? Seriously? This is the year 2013, can we stop shaming feminists who make men uncomfortable with their message? There is no such thing as a large base of "radical feminists". Some exist, and the only reason they suck is not that they are too radical in their feminism, but that they do not sometimes include women of color or transgender people.
Also, pay gaps are universally known to be a phenomenon in western countries, I do not see where you are getting any info saying that the pay gap is fake. Sounds suspicious to be honest with you.
As for the existence of the patriarchy, refer to my first post in this thread. And for Rape Culture, it is essentially the same thing as the patriarchy, in which men have disproportionate power over women in today's society, including over their bodies. We have a culture in which women are too ashamed to say that they were attacked, and that people say they were "asking for it". We have MRA's threatening Anita with rape instead of just disagreeing with her. Rape culture exists if you look around, or socialize with women enough to know one who has been raped, or simply gotten their asses grabbed in the subway, and then blamed for "making a scene" out of it.
Also, I expect video games to adjust much faster than other traditional forms of media. Video games are already way ahead of most mainstream movies, though behind tv shows and books, still.
Also, I am sure you hate whatever paper she wrote because it talks about the patriarchy and rape culture in a way I wish I could (that is to say, with plenty of proper sources and a bibliography, etc).
[editline]12th March 2013[/editline]
Wow yeah 6 years totally a good amount of years for that. Also, notice how the article sets up all the information someone would need to say that she "was asking for it" with her behavior, by going into detail about how naive and drunk she was. It's language like that that denotes what kind of society we live in, even though I am sure the author did not have any bad intentions.
[editline]12th March 2013[/editline]
Have you noticed that women always "get raped"? Why do we not say "someone rapes woman" like this article does? It's not very common.[/QUOTE]
I think this argument is so multifaceted and complexe it's touching on just about every god damn wall of philosophy, what is right/wrong, who decides which way society runs, self-choice, how does our actions/in-actions change our society, how much do we limit a persons freedom of expression, and in the end does it really matter at all. i mean feminists seem unable to comprehend how frightening this subject is for men and especially white men. i was raised by my dad to be chivalrous and kind, that i would be able to settle down with a female, get married and raise a family. however it seems this is not the case, and i can understand how people like me, a white male who's just turned 21 is freaking out because everything we have been taught is apparently offensive and wrong. At this point i have no idea what i should do with my life, i can't write books, movies, or even games because everything i have to work with from the past is inherently sexist. are some white males angry about feminism? i'd say so, because being told that "everything you have been taught is wrong and you are a terrible person for existing" would make anyone angry. to this point is like poking a sleeping dog with a sharp stick and then saying it's the dogs fault when it bites. Lipstick feminists want the understanding of femininity to remain while breaking down and removing the idea of masculinity, all the while marching to the tune of "women are good, men are bad". Young men, me included are left with large amounts of uncertainty and doubt about our futures. i respect the 1st and 2nd wave feminists but at this point 3rd wave feminists are getting really ridiculous. women want more rights than men, societal momentum dictates it. when a mother fights for custody she's a hero and a wonder, but when a father tries to get basic access to his a child he is a MRA hategroup loving kkk praising scumbag.
[QUOTE=Chamango;39888868]See this is where I have a problem, I'm not nearly as bothered by the actual videos as much as I am by the fact she failed to adhere to her kickstarter promises despite being woefully overfunded.[/QUOTE]
So far she has adhered to every promise: That she would make a series of videos with each one being between 20 and 30 minutes long. She even says on the kickstarter page itself that each video will take a long time to produce.
[QUOTE=omggrass;39889045]I think this argument is so multifaceted and complexe it's touching on just about every god damn wall of philosophy, what is right/wrong, who decides which way society runs, self-choice, how does our actions/in-actions change our society, how much do we limit a persons freedom of expression, and in the end does it really matter at all. i mean feminists seem unable to comprehend how frightening this subject is for men and especially white men. i was raised by my dad to be chivalrous and kind, that i would be able to settle down with a female, get married and raise a family. however it seems this is not the case, and i can understand how people like me, a white male who's just turned 21 is freaking out because everything we have been taught is apparently offensive and wrong. At this point i have no idea what i should do with my life, i can't write books, movies, or even games because everything i have to work with from the past is inherently sexist. are some white males angry about feminism? i'd say so, because being told that "everything you have been taught is wrong and you are a terrible person for existing" would make anyone angry. to this point is like poking a sleeping dog with a sharp stick and then saying it's the dogs fault when it bites. Lipstick feminists want the understanding of femininity to remain while breaking down and removing the idea of masculinity, all the while marching to the tune of "women are good, men are bad". Young men, me included are left with large amounts of uncertainty and doubt about our futures. i respect the 1st and 2nd wave feminists but at this point 3rd wave feminists are getting really ridiculous. women want more rights than men, societal momentum dictates it. when a mother fights for custody she's a hero and a wonder, but when a father tries to get basic access to his a child he is an MRA hategroup loving kkk praising scumbag.[/QUOTE]
start Fight Club
[QUOTE=Muthenfrucheir;39888777]but anitas a shithead who basically ran off with 145k more then she even wanted
[editline]12th March 2013[/editline]
then took months to make 1 video[/QUOTE]
But immense over-funding of a kickstarter/indie go go project is not unique to Anita's project, it's a thing with crowd-funding as a whole. Like with the AVGN movie, James Rolfe originally asked for $75,000 but got $325,327 (mainly due to his immense popularity on the internet). Also this is a 12-part series (well technically 13 as Anita split the Damsel in Distress video into two parts) so the estimate $160,000 didn't go into 1 video. And resulting to cheap insults isn't debate.I'm not on Anita's side but getting simple things like these wrong is not good.
[QUOTE=omggrass;39889045]I think this argument is so multifaceted and complexe it's touching on just about every god damn wall of philosophy, what is right/wrong, who decides which way society runs, self-choice, how does our actions/in-actions change our society, how much do we limit a persons freedom of expression, and in the end does it really matter at all. i mean feminists seem unable to comprehend how frightening this subject is for men and especially white men. i was raised by my dad to be chivalrous and kind, that i would be able to settle down with a female, get married and raise a family. however it seems this is not the case, and i can understand how people like me, a white male who's just turned 21 is freaking out because everything we have been taught is apparently offensive and wrong. At this point i have no idea what i should do with my life, i can't write books, movies, or even games because everything i have to work with from the past is inherently sexist. are some white males angry about feminism? i'd say so, because being told that "everything you have been taught is wrong and you are a terrible person for existing" would make anyone angry. to this point is like poking a sleeping dog with a sharp stick and then saying it's the dogs fault when it bites. Lipstick feminists want the understanding of femininity to remain while breaking down and removing the idea of masculinity, all the while marching to the tune of "women are good, men are bad". Young men, me included are left with large amounts of uncertainty and doubt about our futures. i respect the 1st and 2nd wave feminists but at this point 3rd wave feminists are getting really ridiculous. women want more rights than men, societal momentum dictates it. when a mother fights for custody she's a hero and a wonder, but when a father tries to get basic access to his a child he is a MRA hategroup loving kkk praising scumbag.[/QUOTE]
You see that's actually hilarious because your example of child custody is a perfect example of how sexist gender roles also harm men. That happens because society views women as the caretakers for the family, taking care of the kids, the family home and assorted domestic shit, while men are supposed to be the providers for the family.
Next time you make an argument try not to use an example that contradicts what you're saying.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;39888991][URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Guilt_by_association[/URL]
Also, the study is 'Not Found'.
But there is nothing wrong with the abstract provided.[/QUOTE]
Not "Guilt by Association" because the source (Sarkeesian) is the same, the argument is the same, even her sources and methodology are the same. Your use of the fallacy was wrong.
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;39889370]Not "Guilt by Association" because the source (Sarkeesian) is the same, the argument is the same, even her sources and methodology are the same. Your use of the fallacy was wrong.[/QUOTE]
People are not direct sources.
Sources are sources.
[I]I’ll Make a Man Out of You: Strong Women in Science Fiction and Fantasy Television[/I] is a source.
[I]Tropes vs. Women[/I]. Is a source.
Sarkeesian is not a source, she is a person who can be sourced through what they produce.
Take the example:
Source S makes claim C.
Group G, which is currently viewed negatively by the recipient, also makes claim C.
Therefore, source S is viewed by the recipient of the claim as associated to the group G and inherits how negatively viewed it is.
In this situation it is.
[I]Tropes vs. Women[/I] makes claim C.
[I]I’ll Make a Man Out of You[/I], which is currently viewed negatively by the recipient [FlakAttack], also makes claim C.
Therefore, [I]Tropes vs. Women[/I] is viewed by FlakAttack as associated to [I]I’ll Make a Man Out of You[/I] and inherits how negatively viewed it is.
Or
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;39888884]The study is called [I]I’ll Make a Man Out of You: Strong Women in Science Fiction and Fantasy Television[/I], and I highly encourage you to read it, because it shows how skewed her view of reality really is. Considering that representations of men and women in a form of media is both the topic of her master's thesis and her current videos, this is definitely not an Ad Hominem attack as Nodachi thinks it is.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=jiggu;39885391]I've always wondered if you go into hot topic threads and just pick whatever side people seem to be against the most and then spout crap just to get kicks.
Criticism is giving opinion on how to improve towards a goal. Just complaining about how everyone is doing everything wrong is being a huge crybaby.[/QUOTE]
i think the point just flew over your head.
generally critics don't get into the "moving forward" or fantasize about the way society [i]should[/i] be. there are as many solutions to our problems as there are people on this earth. what critics do is try and agitate people into seeing that there [i]is[/i] a problem. they highlight the flaws in society so that the average person can look at them and see "oh, well this is a problem and i think we should do ____ to try and fix it".
you can't have any progress if people stagnate intellectually. people have to be constantly challenged with new and sometimes controversial ideas so that they can critically think about the world we live in and how to fix it.
[editline]12th March 2013[/editline]
oh fuck i came in late to the party. i didn't realize there were 4 pages.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;39889571]i think the point just flew over your head.
generally critics don't get into the "moving forward" or fantasize about the way society [i]should[/i] be. there are as many solutions to our problems as there are people on this earth. what critics do is try and agitate people into seeing that there [i]is[/i] a problem. they highlight the flaws in society so that the average person can look at them and see "oh, well this is a problem and i think we should do ____ to try and fix it".
you can't have any progress if people stagnate intellectually. people have to be constantly challenged with new and sometimes controversial ideas so that they can critically think about the world we live in and how to fix it.[/QUOTE]
People want a solution made for them so they can have the "right" opinion and not get shit on by people, which is the worst feeling in the world
[QUOTE=yawmwen;39889571]i think the point just flew over your head.
generally critics don't get into the "moving forward" or fantasize about the way society [i]should[/i] be. there are as many solutions to our problems as there are people on this earth. what critics do is try and agitate people into seeing that there [i]is[/i] a problem. they highlight the flaws in society so that the average person can look at them and see "oh, well this is a problem and i think we should do ____ to try and fix it".
you can't have any progress if people stagnate intellectually. people have to be constantly challenged with new and sometimes controversial ideas so that they can critically think about the world we live in and how to fix it.[/QUOTE]
That is why I would seriously recommend [url]http://books.google.co.uk/books/about/The_Norton_Anthology_of_Theory_and_Criti.html?id=akU2PwAACAAJ[/url] this to anyone. It'll show you what actually is meant by Criticism.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;39889571]i think the point just flew over your head.
generally critics don't get into the "moving forward" or fantasize about the way society [i]should[/i] be. there are as many solutions to our problems as there are people on this earth. what critics do is try and agitate people into seeing that there [i]is[/i] a problem. they highlight the flaws in society so that the average person can look at them and see "oh, well this is a problem and i think we should do ____ to try and fix it".
you can't have any progress if people stagnate intellectually. people have to be constantly challenged with new and sometimes controversial ideas so that they can critically think about the world we live in and how to fix it.
[editline]12th March 2013[/editline]
oh fuck i came in late to the party. i didn't realize there were 4 pages.[/QUOTE]
Uh no. Criticism implies highlighting what needs to be improved. You cannot improve something without having a goal in mind. For example criticising a new movie is done under the assumption that you want the movie to be as successful as possible(as in widely liked). When you criticise society you highlight issues that it might have in order to move towards a fairer world. You cannot say something is bad without having a mindset of what is good, that's a fact.
[QUOTE=jiggu;39889747]For example criticising a new movie...[/QUOTE]
Criticism is not criticism with a capital C.
This is Critism: [url]http://www.scribd.com/doc/43275531/Zizek-S-Courtly-Love-Or-Woman-as-Thing[/url]
This is criticism: [url]http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/ReviewComplete.asp?FID=135101[/url]
[QUOTE=jiggu;39889747]Uh no. Criticism implies highlighting what needs to be improved. You cannot improve something without having a goal in mind. For example criticising a new movie is done under the assumption that you want the movie to be as successful as possible(as in widely liked). When you criticise society you highlight issues that it might have in order to move towards a fairer world. You cannot say something is bad without having a mindset of what is good, that's a fact.[/QUOTE]
that's only useful to convert people to a specific cause, which isn't necessarily what many social critics are trying to do. it's useful for people who want their ideology spoon fed to them, but that isn't always useful for society.
fair and just societies(imo) are built upon people who are able to think for themselves and critically examine their world. if everyone follows a set ideology(even if it's mine) that they were fed by someone smarter then society would still be, by nature, totalitarian. by that measurement, it is not only not the point of criticism, but defeats the entire purpose of criticism.
i think the average person can look at a critique of society and begin to formulate their own ideas on how to change those things in their own life. it's just that people aren't used to it because, more often than not, we are fed ideology by political and social pundits who are interested in starting a specific movement or reaping profits.
[editline]12th March 2013[/editline]
and criticism can take place without necessarily being overly subjective. for example, it doesn't matter if you think that "chivalry" is good or bad, you can still reach the same critical conclusions about how "chivalry" affects the perception of women or is reflective of our perception of women through more objective analysis.
after you use more objective forms of analysis, [i]then[/i] you can identify whether this is indeed something you feel is harmful to society, and how that change comes about.
[QUOTE=jiggu;39889747]Uh no. Criticism implies highlighting what needs to be improved. You cannot improve something without having a goal in mind. For example criticising a new movie is done under the assumption that you want the movie to be as successful as possible(as in widely liked). When you criticise society you highlight issues that it might have in order to move towards a fairer world. You cannot say something is bad without having a mindset of what is good, that's a fact.[/QUOTE]
The point of works such as Tropes vs. Women in Videogames isn't to make you agree with the author's worldview, but to raise awareness, spark discussion and let people formulate their own opinions, and by extension allow people to think of ways to improve themselves. Which is exactly what it's doing now.
You ask me, the video game world (and the world in general) needs more [url=http://bulletstorm.wikia.com/wiki/Trishka_Novak]Trishkas[/url].
[QUOTE=Dr. Gestapo;39890005]The point of works such as Tropes vs. Women in Videogames isn't to make you agree with the author's worldview, but to raise awareness, spark discussion and let people formulate their own opinions, and by extension allow people to think of ways to improve themselves. Which is exactly what it's doing now.[/QUOTE]
No doubt. But she's also overstepping the facts she presents with her own opinion which at several times have been proven to be uneducated and stupid. I don't think the idea of the video series is wrong, I just don't think she's doing a good job in any way.
[editline]12th March 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=NoDachi;39889800]Criticism is not criticism with a capital C.
This is Critism: [url]http://www.scribd.com/doc/43275531/Zizek-S-Courtly-Love-Or-Woman-as-Thing[/url]
This is criticism: [url]http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/ReviewComplete.asp?FID=135101[/url][/QUOTE]
Uh, both are reviews?
[editline]12th March 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=yawmwen;39889935]that's only useful to convert people to a specific cause, which isn't necessarily what many social critics are trying to do. it's useful for people who want their ideology spoon fed to them, but that isn't always useful for society.
fair and just societies(imo) are built upon people who are able to think for themselves and critically examine their world. if everyone follows a set ideology(even if it's mine) that they were fed by someone smarter then society would still be, by nature, totalitarian. by that measurement, it is not only not the point of criticism, but defeats the entire purpose of criticism.
i think the average person can look at a critique of society and begin to formulate their own ideas on how to change those things in their own life. it's just that people aren't used to it because, more often than not, we are fed ideology by political and social pundits who are interested in starting a specific movement or reaping profits.
[editline]12th March 2013[/editline]
and criticism can take place without necessarily being overly subjective. for example, it doesn't matter if you think that "chivalry" is good or bad, you can still reach the same critical conclusions about how "chivalry" affects the perception of women or is reflective of our perception of women through more objective analysis.
after you use more objective forms of analysis, [i]then[/i] you can identify whether this is indeed something you feel is harmful to society, and how that change comes about.[/QUOTE]
But criticism is still done in the purpose of improving something, no matter how you do it you always have a final goal, you always have a goal in all actions you do, no matter how small.
[QUOTE=jiggu;39890565]Uh, both are reviews?[/QUOTE]
Okay the second one is a review full of ~criticism~ as you so suggested with your movie analogy.
But how the fuck could you possibly call the first one a review. I'm very interested in finding out.
[sp]brotip: Its also from the Norton Anthology, under criticism. But seriously, tell me.[/sp]
[QUOTE=jiggu;39890565]
But criticism is still done in the purpose of improving something, no matter how you do it you always have a final goal, you always have a goal in all actions you do, no matter how small.[/QUOTE]
yea but the difference is that you seek improvement by increased consciousness and awareness, not traditional goals. the goal is simply to show how society is flawed, not how society should be structured or organized.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.