Anita Sarkeesian/Tropes and Women in Gaming

[alanschu]

Full stop, I just came across this gem:

 

 

I see some people like to use the sarkeesian method and ignore the critics. I asked if you guys, as a result of playing video games, now you feel women are Inferior, because that's her whole premise, that video games amplify and reinforce misogyny and sexism

 

Let me answer your question:  Yes.

 

 

Furthermore, let me state that I am not at all thrilled with this line of questioning to support your position.  You're asking for a self-review to be done to determine if people can accurately assess what level of impact the media they have consumed (presumably a media they have enjoyed), and qualitatively determine whether or not consumption of that media has led to a definitive change in perspective that is almost universally considered negative.  it's scientific viability is exceptionally suspect and is literally the type of thing that does leave me angry when reading.  I consider it dishonest at worst, ignorant at best.  Such an inquiry is not useful in debate, nor is it useful for concluding anything in a scientific way at all and as far as I'm concerned, effectively tells us nothing regardless of what the results your inquiry are.

 

 

Are you actually not aware the numerous flaws with your examination?

[Chaz]

Until then, "such a correlation does exist" is just as good a hypothesis as is its opposite.

 

And the moment to belive any hypothesis is true, is when there is evidence for it, and not a second before.

[alanschu]

Another Straw Man incoming? be careful, you don't want to respond to an argument I didn't make, again.

 

No, I'm not suggesting you're making a different argument.  I'm asking you a question in an attempt to illustrate something related.

 

I recognize that you are proposing that there is a claim that "Kidnapping Princess Peach turns people into misogynists."  The point in putting forth my question was to try to peel back the level of specificity in your analysis.  That is, perhaps it isn't so much "Kidnapping Princess Peach turns people into misogynists" but rather "Kidnapping Princess peach may play an influence, along with other types of media and socialization, in perpetuating some level of negative perception towards women."

 

Stepping back and crying "I don't see any studies that show kidnapping princess peach turns people into misogynists" isn't productive.

 

 

 

I said there is no evidence to show correlation between peach beign kidnapped and real world misogyny, can media have an impact? sure. But specifically misogyny for playing Mario? there's no evidence.

 

This is the Straw Man.  Anita never said anything of the like.

 

 

 

And I'm getting tired of responding to your fallacies when you don't even answer to half the arguments I make, and you didn't respond to the question I made either

 

Well I have now responded to the question if that makes you happy.  But my interest certainly HAS been piqued and will go back over your posts later tonight, so I'll go over your arguments then.

 

You're hardly exempt of using fallacies yourself, but then chastise other people for using them.  You take the entire discussion far too literally and end up making straw men such as the idea that "Kidnapping Princess Peach turns you into a misogynist" as being the argument presented.  Never mind such things as "alanschu hates Chaz because Chaz disagrees with him."

 

Some of the extremists that support Anita's perspective may have said that, but Anita has not.  I challenge you to present at any point in her video where she says that kidnapping princess peach turns people into misogynists.

Edited March 18, 2013 by alanschu

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

Until then, "such a correlation does exist" is just as good a hypothesis as is its opposite.

 

And the moment to belive any hypothesis is true, is when there is evidence for it, and not a second before.

 

Especially if said hypothesis would require us to re-evaluate some of our previously held preconceptions.

 

Sarcasm aside, this seems to suggest that IAT scores can be influenced by exposure to certain stimuli. I think it's a safe guess that it works both ways, and is not exclusive to racism.

Edited March 18, 2013 by aluminiumtrioxid

[Blarghagh]

 

 

This.

 

Yeah, I think that's what most feminists, including Sarkeesian, really want, but because we mostly hear them talking about the bad, their views seem limited.

 

In an optimal world, that would be true. But sometimes I feel they are more interested in yelling about opression than actual resolutions.

 

> 

 

I see some people like to use the sarkeesian method and ignore the critics. I asked if you guys, as a result of playing video games, now you feel women are Inferior, because that's her whole premise, that video games amplify and reinforce misogyny and sexism

 

It could reinforce them subconsciously. But until someone creates an implicit misogyny test, we can't really tell.

 

So in short, no evidence that shows correlation between princes peach beign kidnapped and real world misogyny.

 

Absence of evidence doesn't equal evidence of absence, especially since I haven't heard about any studies regarding this question. Until then, "such a correlation does exist" is just as good a hypothesis as is its opposite.

 

 

Correlation =/= causation.

[Chaz]

Full stop, I just came across this gem

 

Yeah i had to ask the same question 3 times and call you out because you never responded, you didn't "come across" anything

 

Let me answer your question:  Yes.

 

Yes you are using the "Sarkeesian Method" or yes you think you are more misogynist because of video games?

 

Furthermore, let me state that I am not at all thrilled with

this line of questioning to support your position.  You're asking for a

self-review to be done to determine if people can accurately assess what

level of impact the media they have consumed

 

I am asking for a self- review to see if you, personally, agree with the view that video games amplify and reinforce misogyny (and aparently you were perfectly able to adamantly respond) this is in no way shape or form intended to determine if everyone is more sexist because they played video games.

 

Stepping back and crying "I don't see any studies that show kidnapping

princess peach turns people into misogynists" isn't productive.

 

lol what? It's the truth! You don't get to accuse someone or something without any evidence, if you make a claim you have to back it up.

 

This is the Straw Man.  Anita never said anything of the like.

 

What the... I never said I was responding to anita, I was responding to you! you seemed to have misinterpreted what I said and I was clarifying, that is not a straw man, man.

Edited March 18, 2013 by Chaz

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

 

Correlation =/= causation.

 

Your alternative hypothesis is welcome, if you have any.

[Chaz]

Some of the extremists that support Anita's perspective may have said

that, but Anita has not.  I challenge you to present at any point in her

video where she says that kidnapping princess peach turns people into

misogynists.

 

I see Anita as an extremsist as well, she's a pro-censorship, anti-sex feminist, I imagine that if it was up to her she would ban video games that she didn't like the same way that she bans people who disagree with her on her youtube channel.

 

You can say "oh you just hate/dislike feminists" but that is not only playing the victim card, it is false, feminism is not one monolithic entity, there is a split between anti-sex feminists and the ones that advocate for sexual liberation, and I have no issue with the latter.

 

Now if you kidnapped princess peach you might be misogynist, but you're not the one that kidnapps her, you're the one that saves her, silly.

Edited March 18, 2013 by Chaz

[Sannom]

I am asking for a self- review to see if you, personally, agree with the view that video games amplify and reinforce misogyny (and apparently you were perfectly able to adamantly respond) this is in no way shape or form intended to determine if everyone is more sexist because they played video games.

I agree that video games, like a lot of popular culture, reinforces sexism, which is already present in a lot of ways in our every-day lives. I have a number of reflexes that are simply sexist, even if you would think that they are 'no big'. Games are the same, it's often little things, but it's always tiring and sometimes you wish they had just put in a little bit more effort.

What the... I never said I was responding to Anita, I was responding to you! you seemed to have misinterpreted what I said and I was clarifying, that is not a straw man, man.

See this, right there? Sexism. You call the 'visible' female person you disagree with by her first name, rather than her last name, as if you knew her. You wouldn't do that for a man. A thing I do too from times to times, without realizing it. And why do you do it? Because you're following your interlocutor, like a good sheep, without thinking of the implications.

I see Anita as an extremsist as well, she's a pro-censorship, anti-sex feminist, I imagine that if it was up to her she would ban video games that she didn't like the same way that she bans people who disagree with her on her youtube channel.

What.

 

Alright, for the record : 'feminism' does not equate 'hatred of men', 'feminist' does not equate 'female supremacist'. And I'm not sure the last thing is a thing outside of fiction, in which 'female supremacy' doesn't even equate 'hatred of men'. I'm looking at you, Lady Venus, you magnificent politically correct bastard!

Edited March 18, 2013 by Sannom

[Volourn]

"You wouldn't do that for a man."

 

I would. i do it all the fukkin' time. Stop being sexist.

 

 

"in which 'female supremacy' doesn't even equate 'hatred of men'."

 

Yes, it does. Just like 'male supremecy' equates to 'hatred of women'.

 

They are both sexist belief statements where the believer of them is a piece of crap.

[Chaz]

See this, right there? Sexism. You call the 'visible' female person you

disagree with by her first name, rather than her last name, as if you

knew her.

 

Well that was good for a laugh, if you're definition of sexism is going to be that broad, then yeah, video games and everything else is sexist. For the record I called her by her last name as well. You're argument is asenine.

Edited March 18, 2013 by Chaz

[Sannom]

Well that was good for a laugh, if you're definition of sexism is going to be that broad, then yeah, video games and everything else is sexist.

Sexism isn't a simple subject, no.

For the record I called her by her last name as well.

Yes, I know, hence why I said that you followed into the steps of the 'opposition'.

And then people tell me that youtube comments are a cesspool, yeah, this isn't that much better.

Don't knock it before you try it. I don't know if there is an english version of Requiem : Chevalier Vampire, but Lady Venus' speech pattern is hilarious.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Interesting point.  Do we (people like you and I) look at the comments that someone like Anita makes differently because we don't really take part in the games that may be particularly egregious towards their depiction of women?

Absolutely. Peoples experience with certain parts of X do factor in to their opinions and view of X. For example if I told someone whose only experience with video games were first-person shooters and sports games that video games were capable of telling great stories on par with novels and films, they would probably not understand where I was coming from, because they have not been exposed to games like PST.

 

I consider myself a fairly diverse gamer, but even in the event that RPGs are my game of choice, I still see some of those "effects" particularly with common things such as attire (specifically armor).  At the same time, I'm not against a female character being drawn "attractively" and when I look at, say Theodora from Civ 5, I go "She looks pretty good.  Well done artist!"

Well of course there are going to be differences in how armor fits male and female characters, but there is a difference from a set of breastplate adjusting to fit a woman's form, and a woman strutting around in a skintight designed to accent her busty form. Edited March 19, 2013 by KaineParker

[alanschu]

But my interest certainly HAS been piqued and will go back over your posts later tonight, so I'll go over your arguments then.

 

In retrospect, my better judgment has prevailed (i.e. as the day went on I was less interested in going over them).  Evidently I don't have the stomach for this type of discussion, and I willingly forfeit my Tireless Rebutter label.  Travesty to the Obsidian Forums I am sure.

 

 

EDIT:

 

 

Well of course there are going to be differences in how armor fits male and female characters, but there is a difference from a set of breastplate adjusting to fit a woman's form, and a woman strutting around in a skintight designed to accent her busty form.

 

Agreed.  I think it's a fine line, perhaps because (for whatever reason) it's something that is being more heavily scrutinized in this particular medium (along with comic books IMO) so attempts are examined more thoroughly than say, movies.

Edited March 19, 2013 by alanschu

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Agreed.  I think it's a fine line, perhaps because (for whatever reason) it's something that is being more heavily scrutinized in this particular medium (along with comic books IMO) so attempts are examined more thoroughly than say, movies.

I think one of the reasons it is scrutinized in more detail in video games and comic books is that the female characters portrayed in those mediums are not real people, so one could see it as creating a standard that no real woman could reach. Which has some truth to it, if you look at the average large breasted anime girl or sultry female video game characters, you do in fact see physiques that are nearly impossible for a real woman to obtain, even with surgical enhancements. Of course(like we covered before IIRC),the problem is taking one extreme example of X and assuming every instance of X is like that.

[alanschu]

That is an interesting point.  Even if an actress is dressed up implausibly, denying that it's a real person is a bit silly.

 

And to echo that, there IS some level of pushback with the excessive amount of airbrushing and other touch ups that occur with print media of both females and males.

[Chaz]

I always like how

shows how seriously Sarkeesian takes her research when she wants to critisize a game. And in case you didn't notice, the annotations were not added by her. Edited March 19, 2013 by Chaz

[aluminiumtrioxid]

I always like how

shows how seriously Sarkeesian takes her research when she wants to critisize a game. And in case you didn't notice, the annotations were not added by her.

 

Erm... way to miss her point.

[Chaz]

Erm... way to miss her point.

 

Her point is always the same, that is  misgynistic, you know, so now if you play Bayonetta now you hate women. And of course she calls it "choose your own patriarchal adventure" again with the delusion of the patriarchy

 

Not to mention that she doesn't know ***** about the game, and at the end it came off slightly racist against the japanese, so yeah, keeping it classy, sarkeesian.

[alanschu]

Erm... way to miss her point.

 

Eh, not too much point in getting bogged down with it IMO.

[Chaz]

Eh, not too much point in getting bogged down with it IMO

 

I love how she and her supporters act as if it has already been proven that the tropes cause real harm for women, when there is no evidence at all. I guess reason goes out the window.

 

Her video series is like those terrorist trials, they put you in front of a camera, read the list of your crimes and then execute you. At no point in her videos is an effort to discuss the issue, there is no discussion.

 

Also what do you suggest we do? we already have an ESRB. are we going to forbid developers and artist from creating sexy characters? The hell with free spech, go radical feminism!

Edited March 19, 2013 by Chaz

[HoonDing]

All in all, much ado about nothing.

[alanschu]

 

To be fair, the two subjects are very different. Violence in popular culture is glorified and glamorized. Some people wants more and more of it, movies and video games have sometimes violence and huge amount of gore as their selling point. We're so permeated by it, how in the world could it have such an impact?

A contrario, sexism in games is much more the result of cluelessness, stupidity, laziness, than outright malice or even intent. Maybe we want those people to just get a clue,
and so we're particularly harsh with them. Like that review I read of Tomb Raider in which the reviewer admits to have been harsh with the game mainly because of 'squandered potential'.

 

 

Hmmm.  I'm not sure if I agree.  I think the reason why hypersexualization exists in these mediums is because, on some level, it is desired.  Again, it's probably not pertinent to focus on the extremes and apply it across the entire medium.  I have seen and read up about some defenses that make me raise an eyeball.  One of the articles I linked here was about an author that went comic book shopping with his girlfriend, and his girlfriend made a less than positive comment about Lady Death and Witchblade, to which she was berated by the store owner.

 

The final part of it was:

 

When both the manager and I explained to him in no uncertain terms as to what he did wrong he shrugged his shoulders. “Hey, I was just trying to help you guys! She couldn’t understand that chicks can be tough and sexy! Not my fault she’s a chauvinist,” he said.

 

 

Which is an interesting way to describe someone simply because she didn't find the cover art to be all that appealing.  I don't think it's a very positive reaction, and serves to undermine the whole subculture.  But the article was an assessment about Nerds and Male Privilege and in it he got the impression that there is some aspect of resistance towards female entrance into nerd culture (The article is here if you're curious).

 

 

Although I do agree that violence specifically, is outright glorified at times, while (to use the extreme) misogyny likely exists on a less explicitly visible stage.  I do feel that watching a scene of someone getting killed in a visceral fashion is more likely to get a response of "Awesome!" from a representative sample population (I'd be lying if I said I didn't do just that from time to time), whereas outright female abuse would be more likely to illicit discomfort and possibly even some level of disdain from the audience.

 

In fact, I'm pretty sure that the clerk in the example above absolutely does not consider himself sexist or a misogynist, and would in fact speak out against explicit acts of either.  I think the issue starts to come with "what exactly is a sexist/misogynistic depiction of a woman?"  His perspective is different than the author's girlfriend (and the author himself).  Why is that?  Is it okay for that different perspective to exist?  Is there anything good/bad about having that particular perspective?  The author obviously isn't the biggest fan, though his experience is immediately soured because whatever transpired happened to upset his girlfriend.  What motivates the clerk to have that perspective, and more importantly, the defensive response to a critical comment.

[Volourn]

This entire threads to defend a proven sexist piece of crap. Disgusting.

 

 

 

Enterainment doesn't make people violent or sexist ort whatever. That is bull. Violence, and sexism have existed well before modern forms of entertainment. Video games weren't around during the world wars, afterall.

 

R00fles!

Edited March 19, 2013 by Volourn

[Elerond]

I find this conversation somewhat hilarious on in it focus on men and how they see themselves.

 

As damsel in distress trope isn't seen bad because how it makes men look women, but how it makes women look themselves, as it draws picture that women themselves can't be heroes, soldiers or anyway active characters. And this the major view point in Sarkeesian's video.

 

And for some reason I have feeling that some people misunderstand Sarkeesian's projects point and focus which was to study if and how popular tropes about women present themselves in games and if/how presentation of this tropes are changed in games during evolution of gaming industry. Project focus is not criticize game/men/male gamers/gaming industry and Sarkeesian didn't do any criticising of them on this video.

 

In my opinion Sarkeesian kept her focus quite well in first video, even though I think that presentation could have been better (read more entertaining) and analytical side of video could have been bit deeper, but of course this was first of two parts episode and usually analytics come end segments of study show I must see that video first before final judgement.