Anita Sarkeesian/Tropes and Women in Gaming

[Zoraptor]

I'd have somewhat more sympathy for RPS' stand on the subject (or rather their approach to the subject, since I broadly agree with much of what they are saying) if they were quite as gung ho about things that could potentially blow back on them and where it could potentially hurt them/ cause them difficulty if they actually made a big deal about it; Doritogate- where one of their own contributors got the shaft from their ad provider- got a delayed, tepid response on the main site because it did not pertain directly to games, to whit:

We had previously considered the story to be one of internal wrangling amongst games journalism, and RPS is primarily about games.

 

If they were consistent it would be fine, but apparently gaming metacommentary like sex biased wage gaps in the industry is relevant to RPS, but for some reason whether or not gaming journalists are getting bungs isn't relevant. It's easy for them to characterise those who criticise them as cave men or whatever, and assert they aren't just doing to for the page impressions or to get their legs over with Feminist Studies majors but- by their own words- things like the wage gap are not things that RPS ought to be covering. As such, they invited questioning of their motivations.

[Rostere]

There's been an incredibly childish backlash against what's really only a reasonable fight against unserious, unrealistic and immature portrayal of women in games. I bet the majority of those who are the reason behind the closing of comments are teens who feel insecure when their view on women is being put under scrutiny.

[BruceVC]

There's been an incredibly childish backlash against what's really only a reasonable fight against unserious, unrealistic and immature portrayal of women in games. I bet the majority of those who are the reason behind the closing of comments are teens who feel insecure when their view on women is being put under scrutiny.

 

 

I agree completely, I read the article on RPS and everything they say is reasonable and accurate.

 

Also they are not saying that there is some conspiracy to shut down any comments from them about sexism they are just saying they want to highlight again the issue of sexism. Thats what they mean when they say " RPS isn't shutting up", at least thats my understanding of the headline

[Malcador]

There's been an incredibly childish backlash against what's really only a reasonable fight against unserious, unrealistic and immature portrayal of women in games. I bet the majority of those who are the reason behind the closing of comments are teens who feel insecure when their view on women is being put under scrutiny.

Odd why that is special - pretty much everything is unserious and unrealistic and immature in games. As for closing the comments who knows, Walker could just be a giant puff like Kuchera is. I guess trolling or disagreeing comments that can be painted as such constitute silencing or something.

 

Meh, it's just the usual "justice!" jawing online, in any case.

[BruceVC]

 

There's been an incredibly childish backlash against what's really only a reasonable fight against unserious, unrealistic and immature portrayal of women in games. I bet the majority of those who are the reason behind the closing of comments are teens who feel insecure when their view on women is being put under scrutiny.

Odd why that is special - pretty much everything is unserious and unrealistic and immature in games. As for closing the comments who knows, Walker could just be a giant puff like Kuchera is. I guess trolling or disagreeing comments that can be painted as such constitute silencing or something.

 

Meh, it's just the usual "justice!" jawing online, in any case.

 

The reason they didn't put comments in is listed below. I emailed him in support of his article and he explained he has already received 900 emails and only 30 were negative, so 5% of total comments are opposed to his view. That makes me happy

 

"The comments are off on this post. This is a reference post, a place we can point people toward to understand our position. I am not willing to let this post become yet another platform for the people who wish to silence this debate. On this occasion I have no desire to publicly put up with the invasive ignorant spite and fearful anger that will be littered amongst the usual excellent comments from our fantastic readers. This is not an attempt to stifle discussion – RPS provides ample opportunity for it, and will continue to do so. If you want to communicate your thoughtful disagreement or unpleasant bile, my email address is at the top of this page, where your remarks will receive an audience of one. So please do use it. I will read and consider everything."

[Malcador]

Yeah, he's having a nice time on the cross with that explanation, heh. Seems he blocked the comments for nothing with 95% of respondents praising him for his brave stand.

[Nightshape]

Anita has one interest, and it isn't feminism. She just want's to be famous. It's bollocks.

[AwesomeOcelot]

...featuring two women in skimpy outfits being electrocuted and spanked as they play Rock Band...

I fail to see the problem with this, without having seen the video because it has been taken down. Lecheroineineus isn't a word, maybe they meant lecherousness, and this kind of bent that's anti-sexuality and prudish has nothing to do with sexism, it's sexism itself, I think it comes from an anti-equality position and detracts from feminism, one of the many reasons why feminism as a brand is tarnished so badly.

 

The argument is fallacious, seeing all the people that share some categories with you doing something you wouldn't enjoy can be alienating (of course no one complains when it's something they support), but there are two basic facts most women in game related media are not in their underwear, spanked, or electrocuted and no rational female would ever feel alienated by one video, it suggests that this is ubiquitous which is an extreme exaggeration, I've never seen a gaming related video where anyone person gets spanked and electrocuted, and if even I wanted to, now I can't.

 

It's so illiberal, just because you don't like it doesn't mean you can lie about it and make up excuses to want to take it down. By all means, if people think their is an audience they can make content that they'd like, the push to censor and destroy content that's not meant for them, seems just malicious to me.

[Amentep]

but there are two basic facts most women in game related media are not in their underwear, spanked, or electrocuted and no rational female would ever feel alienated by one video, it suggests that this is ubiquitous which is an extreme exaggeration, I've never seen a gaming related video where anyone person gets spanked and electrocuted, and if even I wanted to, now I can't.

At a guess, I'd assume the argument is that the video in question (which - to be fair - I haven't seen either) is not a case of being a lone video that is easily ignored, but within context part of a continuing series of gaming ads that could be considered a systemic issue rather than a "lone ad in the wilds" issue, and thus less easy to ignore.

[Fighter]

There's been an incredibly childish backlash against what's really only a reasonable fight against unserious, unrealistic and immature portrayal of women in games. I bet the majority of those who are the reason behind the closing of comments are teens who feel insecure when their view on women is being put under scrutiny.

 

So basically his aim is to censor those things?

[Elerond]

 

There's been an incredibly childish backlash against what's really only a reasonable fight against unserious, unrealistic and immature portrayal of women in games. I bet the majority of those who are the reason behind the closing of comments are teens who feel insecure when their view on women is being put under scrutiny.

 

So basically his aim is to censor those things?

 

Or other words he express his freedom of speech, by expressing his dislike such portrayal and tries to convince other people that his dislike has genuine reason behind it and hopes that other people will also support of his view of things.

 

And don't think that you can actually count it as censorship as he only ask people not to do something instead of trying to get governing bodies not to publish something.

[AwesomeOcelot]

 

 

but there are two basic facts most women in game related media are not in their underwear, spanked, or electrocuted and no rational female would ever feel alienated by one video, it suggests that this is ubiquitous which is an extreme exaggeration, I've never seen a gaming related video where anyone person gets spanked and electrocuted, and if even I wanted to, now I can't.

 

At a guess, I'd assume the argument is that the video in question (which - to be fair - I haven't seen either) is not a case of being a lone video that is easily ignored, but within context part of a continuing series of gaming ads that could be considered a systemic issue rather than a "lone ad in the wilds" issue, and thus less easy to ignore.

 

 

My point was, as I mentioned, is that he shouldn't be using lone videos as examples of a systematic issue suggesting it's ubiquitous, it's clearly an exaggeration. That's the thing about anecdotes, they're not representative, not in terms of content or in terms of prevalence, we don't know how many women see them or what effect it has on them, probably way more women saw that video when they seek out that content and post about it on blogs to complain about it. I question the motives of people who seek out content for other audiences to then highlight for people that it was never designed to appeal to, and then to complain it's alienating to those people because it's not designed for them. The argument seems to be "content I don't like or isn't designed for me shouldn't exist".

[BruceVC]

 

...featuring two women in skimpy outfits being electrocuted and spanked as they play Rock Band...

I fail to see the problem with this, without having seen the video because it has been taken down. Lecheroineineus isn't a word, maybe they meant lecherousness, and this kind of bent that's anti-sexuality and prudish has nothing to do with sexism, it's sexism itself, I think it comes from an anti-equality position and detracts from feminism, one of the many reasons why feminism as a brand is tarnished so badly.

 

The argument is fallacious, seeing all the people that share some categories with you doing something you wouldn't enjoy can be alienating (of course no one complains when it's something they support), but there are two basic facts most women in game related media are not in their underwear, spanked, or electrocuted and no rational female would ever feel alienated by one video, it suggests that this is ubiquitous which is an extreme exaggeration, I've never seen a gaming related video where anyone person gets spanked and electrocuted, and if even I wanted to, now I can't.

 

It's so illiberal, just because you don't like it doesn't mean you can lie about it and make up excuses to want to take it down. By all means, if people think their is an audience they can make content that they'd like, the push to censor and destroy content that's not meant for them, seems just malicious to me.

 

I find your point difficult to understand and  I'm sorry but if you haven't seen the video how can you comment? The crux of the point is the sexist nature of video. The video was and is degrading to women and it was stupid. I don't get how people can debate something that they haven't experienced. It just seems like a waste of discussion to me.

Also feminism does not have a bad image in the circles I move in, I'm sorry thats how you feel.

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

but there are two basic facts most women in game related media are not in their underwear, spanked, or electrocuted and no rational female would ever feel alienated by one video, it suggests that this is ubiquitous which is an extreme exaggeration, I've never seen a gaming related video where anyone person gets spanked and electrocuted, and if even I wanted to, now I can't.

 

At a guess, I'd assume the argument is that the video in question (which - to be fair - I haven't seen either) is not a case of being a lone video that is easily ignored, but within context part of a continuing series of gaming ads that could be considered a systemic issue rather than a "lone ad in the wilds" issue, and thus less easy to ignore.

 

My point was, as I mentioned, is that he shouldn't be using lone videos as examples of a systematic issue suggesting it's ubiquitous, it's clearly an exaggeration. That's the thing about anecdotes, they're not representative, not in terms of content or in terms of prevalence, we don't know how many women see them or what effect it has on them, probably way more women saw that video when they seek out that content and post about it on blogs to complain about it. I question the motives of people who seek out content for other audiences to then highlight for people that it was never designed to appeal to, and then to complain it's alienating to those people because it's not designed for them. The argument seems to be "content I don't like or isn't designed for me shouldn't exist".

 

Your point makes no sense, so I have to be a women to find a video sexist or degrading to women?

[Malcador]

Streisand effect skews things, I think.

[Nonek]

I stopped reading RPS a while ago, the endless articles preaching of sexism in the industry were not particularly bothersome as that's nothing to do with me, I just happen to think that their standards have plummeted rather severely lately. That Nathan Greyson chap especially is quite clearly trying to network a job in the industry rather than undertaking unbiased criticism, the mans interviews fairly much function as a developer bidet, except when he's trying to wedge more sensationalist claims of sexism into an unrelated topic.

[Fighter]

Or other words he express his freedom of speech, by expressing his dislike such portrayal and tries to convince other people that his dislike has genuine reason behind it and hopes that other people will also support of his view of things.

 

And don't think that you can actually count it as censorship as he only ask people not to do something instead of trying to get governing bodies not to publish something.

 

Thing is me and him would probably agree on what makes a good female character. But I can't support a stance that's instead of saying "more of this please" says "stop doing that."

[AwesomeOcelot]

 

 

 

 

 

 

but there are two basic facts most women in game related media are not in their underwear, spanked, or electrocuted and no rational female would ever feel alienated by one video, it suggests that this is ubiquitous which is an extreme exaggeration, I've never seen a gaming related video where anyone person gets spanked and electrocuted, and if even I wanted to, now I can't.

 

At a guess, I'd assume the argument is that the video in question (which - to be fair - I haven't seen either) is not a case of being a lone video that is easily ignored, but within context part of a continuing series of gaming ads that could be considered a systemic issue rather than a "lone ad in the wilds" issue, and thus less easy to ignore.

 

 

My point was, as I mentioned, is that he shouldn't be using lone videos as examples of a systematic issue suggesting it's ubiquitous, it's clearly an exaggeration. That's the thing about anecdotes, they're not representative, not in terms of content or in terms of prevalence, we don't know how many women see them or what effect it has on them, probably way more women saw that video when they seek out that content and post about it on blogs to complain about it. I question the motives of people who seek out content for other audiences to then highlight for people that it was never designed to appeal to, and then to complain it's alienating to those people because it's not designed for them. The argument seems to be "content I don't like or isn't designed for me shouldn't exist".

 

 

 

Your point makes no sense, so I have to be a women to find a video sexist or degrading to women?

 

 

No, you have to be a woman to be alienated by seeing women who are not like you or are doing something you wouldn't. I haven't seen the video in question, but from how it's described it isn't sexist. Having electrocution and spanking is common in BDSM, which can involve degrading, but BDSM can be consensual and an expression of someone's sexuality, it's not wrong. Degrading to women in general? No, that's generally more of a prudish reaction and projection, these people are individuals involved in role play, it's a fantasy. These people talk about systematic issues of society wrapped in the phrase "the patriarchy", but this reaction is also a symptom of similar issues.

[Elerond]

 

Or other words he express his freedom of speech, by expressing his dislike such portrayal and tries to convince other people that his dislike has genuine reason behind it and hopes that other people will also support of his view of things.

 

And don't think that you can actually count it as censorship as he only ask people not to do something instead of trying to get governing bodies not to publish something.

 

Thing is me and him would probably agree on what makes a good female character. But I can't support a stance that's instead of saying "more of this please" says "stop doing that."

 

I agree that good example is often better than saying one should not do something

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

 

 

but there are two basic facts most women in game related media are not in their underwear, spanked, or electrocuted and no rational female would ever feel alienated by one video, it suggests that this is ubiquitous which is an extreme exaggeration, I've never seen a gaming related video where anyone person gets spanked and electrocuted, and if even I wanted to, now I can't.

 

At a guess, I'd assume the argument is that the video in question (which - to be fair - I haven't seen either) is not a case of being a lone video that is easily ignored, but within context part of a continuing series of gaming ads that could be considered a systemic issue rather than a "lone ad in the wilds" issue, and thus less easy to ignore.

 

My point was, as I mentioned, is that he shouldn't be using lone videos as examples of a systematic issue suggesting it's ubiquitous, it's clearly an exaggeration. That's the thing about anecdotes, they're not representative, not in terms of content or in terms of prevalence, we don't know how many women see them or what effect it has on them, probably way more women saw that video when they seek out that content and post about it on blogs to complain about it. I question the motives of people who seek out content for other audiences to then highlight for people that it was never designed to appeal to, and then to complain it's alienating to those people because it's not designed for them. The argument seems to be "content I don't like or isn't designed for me shouldn't exist".

 

 

Your point makes no sense, so I have to be a women to find a video sexist or degrading to women?

 

No, you have to be a woman to be alienated by seeing women who are not like you or are doing something you wouldn't. I haven't seen the video in question, but from how it's described it isn't sexist. Having electrocution and spanking is common in BDSM, which can involve degrading, but BDSM can be consensual and an expression of someone's sexuality, it's not wrong. Degrading to women in general? No, that's generally more of a prudish reaction and projection, these people are individuals involved in role play, it's a fantasy. These people talk about systematic issues of society wrapped in the phrase "the patriarchy", but this reaction is also a symptom of similar issues.

 

Yes context is important  in life but  in this case this video is not a video promoting BDSM but a video that is trying to appeal to gamers. Please explain to me what message you are sending to prospective gamers when women are being degraded in this way? Where is the positive to this type of marketing?

[Fighter]

Yes context is important  in life but  in this case this video is not a video promoting BDSM but a video that is trying to appeal to gamers. Please explain to me what message you are sending to prospective gamers when women are being degraded in this way? Where is the positive to this type of marketing?

 

It's a male sexual fantasy in the spirit of BDSM. Gaming is a fantasy wish fulfilment, that's why it's meant to appeal to them. it's got games and sex appeal.

[AwesomeOcelot]

...in this case this video is not a video promoting BDSM but a video that is trying to appeal to gamers.

Not necessarily all gamers, it is just one video after all. Your comment seems to suggest gamer and fans of BDSM are mutually exclusive, this is not the case.

Please explain to me what message you are sending to prospective gamers when women are being degraded in this way? Where is the positive to this type of marketing?

I don't know if they were degraded. This video is not necessarily for prospective gamers, I don't know if many prospective gamers saw it, I don't know if they watch Machinima, that seems odd to me. It's an entertaining show for some gamers (I guess, for some people, having never seen it myself) that's there to get ad revenue.

[Drowsy Emperor]

I do so love it when everyone brings their little activ-ism along to a game discussion.

 

Makes for good kindling.

Edited April 8, 2013 by Drowsy Emperor

[Gfted1]

I do so love it when everyone brings their little activ-ism along to a game discussion.

 

Makes for good kindling.

 

 

 

Enjoy.

[Amentep]

For a moment, I thought he said "Activision" and was thinking Pitfall Harry.