"Why are you so angry?" Anita Sarkeesian, Gamergate, Sad Puppies, and online harassment

[eyenon15]

 
she gets her national attention because of weathering the epic **** storm of controversy she had to.

But not from the content of her videos.

[C.T. Phipps]

But not from the content of her videos.

 

As I told, Lyanna Stark, re: the importance of feminine representation in certain genres in the feminist thread, a lot of times its less about the message than a message exists.

 

Saarkesian's videos created a national dialogue.

 

Even if their message boils down to: "We could use more female characters in video games who aren't being kidnapped, killed, or used for titillation." To which I say, "Duh." It's just that message apparently threatened a massive number of gamers. So perhaps it was an anvil which needed to be dropped.

[DanteGabriel]

 

Even if their message boils down to: "We could use more female characters in video games who aren't being kidnapped, killed, or used for titillation."

 

Also a point that shouldn't have to be made, but really really does.

[eyenon15]

As I told, Lyanna Stark, re: the importance of feminine representation in certain genres in the feminist thread, a lot of times its less about the message than a message exists.
 
Saarkesian's videos created a national dialogue.
 
Even if their message boils down to: "We could use more female characters in video games who aren't being kidnapped, killed, or used for titillation."

I suppose it's good that it opens up feminism conversations that go beyond gaming.

But even if her message is "female characters in video games need better whatever"
Still a pretty bad summary of video games. The vast majority of video game characters that are mowed down and killed without remorse are male characters.
If there is a problem with video games that dangerously invades the real world it's not something that only women are primarily or majority victims of.

[TrackerNeil]

Still a pretty bad summary of video games. The vast majority of video game characters that are mowed down and killed without remorse are male characters.
If there is a problem with video games that dangerously invades the real world it's not something that only women are primarily or majority victims of.

 

Isn't this just a video-game specific "all lives matter"? I'm not as familiar with video games as some, but my husband is an avid player and I consistently see female characters who are sexualized, terrorized, and terrorized in a sexual way in which male characters are not. But I think this is basically a question of privilege; you either see the effects of privilege or you don't. Trying to get others to perceive that is like trying to explain that a specific collection of notes is a melody and not just mice jumping on piano keys.

[Zorral]

This study concludes males who are gaming losers are also "losers offlline" -- and are the ones who commit most of the harassment.  If this has any bearing on the subject, I for one can't say!  :dunno:

 

Ooops, I missed during my first go through of the comments that DanteGabriel had already brought this up.

 

I apologize!  It's so annoying for posters to read repetition of remarks, comments and references over and over again because some posters don't bother to go through the previous entries to see whether they are adding something or merely repeating!

[C.T. Phipps]

I have a weird tangent which I'm debating adds anything to this but I'm going to post anyway.

 

Be forewarned.

 

One of the things I've noticed is, despite the efforts of gametavists like Gamergate, is how the environment of video games is changing toward women-in ways both great and small. One of the go-to examples of Ms. Saarkesian is Splatterhouse 2 for "awful awful" depiction of women in games. For those unfamiliar with the original beat-em-up. You play Jason Voorhee's twin who kills a bunch of monsters to rescue your girlfriend only to realize, PSYCHE, she's a monster and you have to slaughter her in the end. Jennefer is a Maguffin until she's a boss and the whole focus is entirely on the protagonist's pain and the gut punch of violence against a woman.

 

And the thing is, during the remake, they did something WEIRD which got some interesting commentary. For Splatterhouse: The Remake, they incorporated the same basic plot of the original game only....Jennifer was an actual character. They DOUBLED DOWN on the fanservice, though, given you could collect a dozen Pin-Ups of Jennifer throughout the game, including CGI nude ones.

 

Jennifer in normal attire: http://splatterhouse.kontek.net/10-27/jennifer_01.jpg

 

Awful, right?

 

Yes and no.

 

It was shameless pandering to the fourteen year old boy market, who by now, had access to real nudity via the internet if they could buy the Mature rated title but it  didn't get criticized the same way they could have by feminists (though there WAS plenty of criticism) because the pin-ups were framed with letters from Jennifer to the protagonist. We found out she loved Punk rock, they'd been together for six months, they were thinking of getting married, she and the hero had gone to Vacation in Hawaii, she was studying Paranormal Psychology, she had a great sense of humor, and a few other miscellaneous facts.

 

The situation in video games was to the point that nudity in video games and fanservice, necessarily, wasn't even in the problem but the presentation of women without any context other than being dolls. The game got some (faint) but interesting praise for the fact they presented an actual woman as the Damsel in Distress and remarked the game might have been actually fun if they'd had her as a character other than a goal.

 

A similar thing happened with BJ in Wolfenstein: The New Order where he begins a sexual relationship with another character with a surprising lack of drama. The two characters developed a friendship and decided to start having sex. The game got a surprising amount of praise for the fact it was two adults having sex with no minigame or persuasion necessary but, "Two adults have sex because that's what adults do sometimes."

 

Games are maturing.

 

Sometimes a little, sometimes a lot. I use the examples above rather than stuff like Dragon Age, too, because they are the kinds of things we'd think would be at the bottom of the list.

[eyenon15]

 
Isn't this just a video-game specific "all lives matter"? I'm not as familiar with video games as some, but my husband is an avid player and I consistently see female characters who are sexualized, terrorized, and terrorized in a sexual way in which male characters are not. But I think this is basically a question of privilege; you either see the effects of privilege or you don't. Trying to get others to perceive that is like trying to explain that a specific collection of notes is a melody and not just mice jumping on piano keys.

Right, the inability to perceive ones own privilege can go either way.
Such as wincing and feeling uncomfortable at a female character being sexualized while not even noticing the 20 male characters that were put in the game specifically to be murdered.

[Howdyphillip]

I suppose it's good that it opens up feminism conversations that go beyond gaming.

But even if her message is "female characters in video games need better whatever"
Still a pretty bad summary of video games. The vast majority of video game characters that are mowed down and killed without remorse are male characters.
If there is a problem with video games that dangerously invades the real world it's not something that only women are primarily or majority victims of.

I think you are arguing two different subjects here. Do you really believe that there is no sexism in video games because more men die in them than women? I do not understand your point.

[C.T. Phipps]

Right, the inability to perceive ones own privilege can go either way.
Such as wincing and feeling uncomfortable at a female character being sexualized while not even noticing the 20 male characters that were put in the game specifically to be murdered.

 

While you raise a point about violence against men being acceptable, there is the valid rebuttal that men can and will act like asshats to women while being less likely to mow down people in a RL Call of Duty.

 

A study done on people said that media didn't make people more violence, Jack Thompson's lunacy aside, but they could affect how people REACTED to violence. If you were exposed to media which said murderers should die 24/7, you weren't more likely to go kill a murderer but if you heard about one being killed in RL, you would probably react differently to a person without said exposure.

 

I actually brought this up in my book Esoterrorism (not a plug, I swear on....okay, kinda pluggish) where there's a conversation between the leads about how messed up the organization they worked for is because they encouraged its agents to think of themselves as movie-like spies to help deal with the fact they were murderers, blackmailers, and professional extortionists (as part of their job suppressing the supernatural).

 

The female co-lead, Shannon, said that she was expected to be a seducer and prostitute herself because that's how female agents were often treated and as a Lilin she could shapeshift--so the best use the male heads had for her was a Honey Trap versus the HUNDREDS of other uses a male agent with similar abilities might get assigned to do.

 

The male co-lead, Derek, pointed out that he was expected to be an emotionless killer who was called to seduce/betray people too and not care about how that affected him--just act like the relationships were disposable because, again, he was supposed to be a charming sociopath who viewed sex causally. That's how male agents were expected to behave.

 

They agreed BOTH of them were getting the short end of the stick.

[eyenon15]

I think you are arguing two different subjects here. Do you really believe that there is no sexism in video games because more men die in them than women? I do not understand your point.

My point is that "tropes in video games" do not exist for only female characters.
If one is going to make the argument that the only tropes that are worth noting as harmful are those that are applied to female characters, well that's shitty work IMO.

[Wise Fool]

Right, the inability to perceive ones own privilege can go either way.
Such as wincing and feeling uncomfortable at a female character being sexualized while not even noticing the 20 male characters that were put in the game specifically to be murdered.

The male characters weren't murdered because they're male.

 

There just happen to be more male characters overall.

 

And who exactly is it that doesn't even notice violence in games? What kind of privilege is this these hypothetical people have?

[NestorMakhnosLovechild]

My point is that "tropes in video games" do not exist for only female characters.
If one is going to make the argument that the only tropes that are worth noting as harmful are those that are applied to female characters, well that's shitty work IMO.

 

No offense, but this kind of stuff is sex/gender studies 101. Google "toxic masculinity." Gloria Steinem wrote "Women's Liberation Aims to Free Men Too" 45 years ago. The idea that "sexism hurts men, too!" is, at this point, a trivial observation that nonetheless still had to be pointed by feminists before it could be reappropriated by bigots who still somehow manage to despise feminism. 

 

Sarkeesian never argued that tropes don't exist for male characters. She never argued that the only tropes worth noting are those that are harmful are those that apply to female characters. But that's not, right now, the aspect of video games that she's looking at, and it seems like you have a true failure to grasp her project (such that it is - I have my own issues with it, although I do think it's valuable) on its own terms, and not the terms you'd like to project upon it. That's not Sarkeesian's failings. Those are your failings. 

[C.T. Phipps]

My point is that "tropes in video games" do not exist for only female characters.
If one is going to make the argument that the only tropes that are worth noting as harmful are those that are applied to female characters, well that's shitty work IMO.

 

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MenAreTheExpendableGender

 

It's a part of many schools of feminism that men are victims of "toxic masculinity" the same as women.

Essentially, being pigeonholed into violence, shallow relationships, and adversarial competition.

[eyenon15]

 
No offense, but this kind of stuff is sex/gender studies 101. Google "toxic masculinity." Gloria Steinem wrote "Women's Liberation Aims to Free Men Too" 45 years ago. The idea that "sexism hurts men, too!" is, at this point, a trivial observation that nonetheless still had to be pointed by feminists before it could be reappropriated by bigots who still somehow manage to despise feminism. 
 
Sarkeesian never argued that tropes don't exist for male characters. She never argued that the only tropes worth noting are those that are harmful are those that apply to female characters. But that's not, right now, the aspect of video games that she's looking at, and it seems like you have a true failure to grasp her project (such that it is - I have my own issues with it, although I do think it's valuable) on its own terms, and not the terms you'd like to project upon it. That's not Sarkeesian's failings. Those are your failings. 

Ah so, you are agreeing with me that sexism against women in video games isn't the worst problem they have, it's just the one thing that Anita focuses on.
We will see how this holds up, I don't think her videos are portrayed or taken that way but sure you can make that claim. I don't buy it.

[C.T. Phipps]

Ah so, you are agreeing with me that sexism against women in video games isn't the worst problem they have, it's just the one thing that Anita focuses on.
We will see how this holds up, I don't think her videos are portrayed or taken that way but sure you can make that claim. I don't buy it.

 

Eh, there's a false equivalence here too.

"I think we should focus on the environment."

"But what about child abuse?"
 

I mean, both are bad but focusing on one doesn't mean you support the later being ignored.

[eyenon15]

 
Eh, there's a false equivalence here too.
"I think we should focus on the environment."

"But what about child abuse?"
 
I mean, both are bad but focusing on one doesn't mean you support the later being ignored.

I think if you focus on sexualization of women and ignore a child being abused in the next room, you are no kind of hero. Which to an extent is what Anita does in her videos.

Next room meaning the same video game

[sologdin]

hardly an argument against her position to point out that there are other positions worthy of her attention.

[DanteGabriel]

I think if you focus on sexualization of women and ignore a child being abused in the next room, you are no kind of hero. Which to an extent is what Anita does in her videos.

Next room meaning the same video game

 

Your attempts to find something to criticize about Sarkeesian's work (while claiming you don't want to get into specifics about what you disagree with in her videos) is getting transparent and pathetic.

 

Now she is "no kind of hero" because she should be focusing on child abuse instead of carrying out her plainly stated thesis to analyze sexist tropes in video games? Did she claim to be a hero in her videos? Hrm, I suppose you'd actually have to watch her videos before you could answer that.

[Lyanna Stark]

 

Social reform. A general change to society to be more equitable in terms of rights, cultures, and freedom. Social justice is, to me, fundamentally, a progressive movement for improving the lot of society by examining the assumptions which underlay it and work to alter them for the better.

 

Economic disparity, gay rights, feminism, religious freedom, anti-torture, and other elements are bedrocks of what I consider to be the movement.

 

 

I actually wrote a pretty big post to you, Lyanna Stark in the feminism thread which I was surprised you never responded to re: The Witcher 3. Also a follow up re: Deus Ex.

 

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/131038-feminism-distractingly-sexy-edition/page-12#entry7188040

 

http://asoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/topic/131038-feminism-distractingly-sexy-edition/page-12#entry7188070

 

Needless to say, I could also speak to you at length about the issues of the Witcher 2. Albeit, I wrote an article criticising it myself on my blog.

My opinion on it, however, was "Flawed but actually managed to make female character prominent, important, three-dimensional, fully-realized, and dealing with the horrific patriarchy of the setting."

 

As for Anita and violence, her True Grit video is the best one to reference. Where, basically, my opinion can be summarized as, "Everything you said I disagree with."

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbiP3wxImAY

 

 

As I have not yet played Witcher 3, only watched excerpts, and I have not seen True Grit, I cannot speak to her commentary on those particular titles. However, I'll say this here for posterity: I have yet seen her comment on one video game I HAVE played and thought "Wow she is wrong". Most of the time, I think she is spot on. Sometimes I have minor quibbles with her points. Most of the time the points she makes should be so painfully obvious as to not have to be made.

 

Despite not having seen True Grit, I watched Anita's video on it and can see absolutely zero controversial things in it. She is critisising it from a point of view that a woman taking a tough guy role is accepting traditional male values at "face value" and isn't struggling with what feminists are, which is to change the prioritising of what is valued. Also, she spends roughly 2.5 minutes out of 6.5 telling us what she liked about Mattie, then the rest mostly explaining the background theory which is basic third wave feminism 101 stuff and then rounds it off with a conclusion, more or less. Personally I think she could have been a bit clearer on explaining values traditionally tied to femininity, but then on the other hand, it's far better to read Serano for that if it's something strange and new to people. On Feminist Frequency she also frequently lists a lot of source material, so it's often quite simple to go to the articles or books she uses as sources for further reading.

 

Interpreting Anita's video as conflating feminism with hippie pacifism is to completely miss the point. She is discussing attribute association and the values traditionally bestowed on these attributes. To make this super obvious to anyone keen on missing the point, she even states "I like flawed characters". In other words: she makes the point that Mattie is *not a feminist character*, not that the movie is bad, that the character is awful, or anything like that. In fact, the general view you take away is that Anita liked Mattie's character, she approved of it very much, just that it isn't a feminist character. I cannot see anything strange or odd in this. 

 

 

As for Adam Jensen, my original interpretation still stands. I can't see anything you added that changes a thing in it, just lots of assumptions without any basis in the actual story. He's put forward to us as an interesting character who is then criminally underdeveloped for no reason what so ever. 

 

 

 

What Adam and Geralt do share is their role as deeply disillusioned humanists and romantics which are surrounded by hellish worlds of apathy, greed, and bigotry. Both characters appear to be stoic on the outside but in the former case, it is because Adam seems GENUINELY UNABLE to articulate his feelings while Geralt has chosen to feign disinterest because the world is such a craphole.

 

 

To quote Anita, this is a trope. It is a super overused trope with the masculine dudebro who has such a hard time showing his emotions. You may try and apply some sort of extra interpretation on top that suits you, but that is you making stuff up. There is nothing in  the actual game canon to support it. I even got the sodding DLC to Deus Ex HR even though working a full time job plus commute plus kids means it's eating up the time I should sleep to play it. Even so, there is nothing in the original game nor the DLC to delve into how Adam is a disillusioned humanist and a romantic. The only things we have are the broken mirror, some stuff in his flat ( the book titles are repeated over and over and over, it's rubbish) and his one line "I did not ask for this". How he feels about being an amputee we don't get to hear about, how he feels about Megan we get no resolution to. How he feels about almost anything we don't get anything about since he is without feeling.

 

As for Geralt, at least in Witcher 2, he could be hewn out of rock. 

 

 

 

Way to exaggerate! Sarkeesian is a public figure and is being treated the way all other media critics are treated online.

 

 

As far as I know, she wasn't actually a very public figure when this whole thing started. She was relatively unknown, and her kickstarter was left more or less alone by harassers until someone on 4chan or some subreddit or something started an internet mob and targeted her. Of course, she ended up becoming a public figure, but that was not the origin of the harassment. 

 

 

 

I don't think anyone here has ever said "anyone who disagrees with Anita Sarkeesian is a rape-minded death-threat-making asshole" -- so I'm not sure the point really did have to be made. Or at least, it could have been made once, rather than your repeated reminders that you think Sarkeesian sucks (but won't say why) but you're totally not into making rape and death threats.

 

 

Most likely because most people who claim she sucks haven't watcher her videos. It's easier to discard anything and everything she says that way since it requires no effort and no thought.