Journalism and sexism in the games industry

[Meshugger]

One of the writers of "Gamers are dead" articles are quitting and going freelance.

 

https://archive.today/4BFnU

[Nakia]

Games are art.  Whether made by one person or a hundred they are creative.  I may not like certain games but that is just my opinion, my taste.  I play games I like just as I buy books or pictures I like.  Someone who knows my taste in games can suggest a game to me but the choice is up to me. Academic value or what "experts" think is of no importance to me.  I am the expert on what I like and don't like.

 

Do you know why Shakespeare is so well know and studied?  Some guy liked his plays so much he had them copied;  There were other popular playwrights of the time but most of their plays have been lost.

Edited November 21, 2014 by Nakia

[Blarghagh]

Didn't Shakespeare steal most of his stuff? Or is that just a crazy rumour I heard?

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Didn't Shakespeare steal most of his stuff? Or is that just a crazy rumour I heard?

There's a ton of uncertainty around Shakespeare. You could probably find contradictory theories about any single facet of his life or work.

[JadedWolf]

Didn't Shakespeare steal most of his stuff? Or is that just a crazy rumour I heard?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakespeare_authorship_question

 

I've never been very convinced about these theories.

[Blarghagh]

So pretty much crazy rumour I heard. Thanks!

[Nakia]

 

Didn't Shakespeare steal most of his stuff? Or is that just a crazy rumour I heard?

There's a ton of uncertainty around Shakespeare. You could probably find contradictory theories about any single facet of his life or work.

 

Good thing they didn't have Twitter in those days.   Who ever wrote the plays it was they guy that had them copied who saved them for college students to study as the classic example of great English literature.  Somerset Maugham pointed out that the classics of today come from the popular works of yesterday.

[Blarghagh]

http://thespectacularspider-girl.tumblr.com/post/102919064149/representation-of-women-in-video-games-the-cause

 

An interesting article about a woman's perspective about double standard in video games.

[Longknife]

Holy **** how did we miss this and why is this not satire?!: http://archive.today/o63iI

 

 

Pages 2 and 3 are as follows:

 

 

“Folks around here tell of a fabulously rich family that once lived in one of the houses in this village,” an elderly character in Kakariko confides. “But they say that the entire family was cursed due to their greed! Who knows what might happen to those who are consumed by greed.”

By focusing on the greed of individuals, the game ignores how private property incentivizes and even mandates such behavior. And with this moralizing focus comes a belief that society’s economic ills are intractable because of humanity’s flawed nature.

The racial, ethnic and religious traits of the “good characters” and the “bad characters” within the game also demonstrate a certain xenophobia. All of the good characters, such as the Hylians and Kokiri, are white. In contrast, all of the bad characters, such as the thieving Gerudo and their king, Ganondorf, have brown skin. The Gerudo live in the desert, and in case it wasn’t clear what real-life group of people they are based on, the original Gerudo symbol is strongly reminiscent of the Islamic star and crescent.

The title’s perspective on sex is arguably summarized in an advertisement for “Ocarina,” which asks, “Willst thou get the girl? Or play like one?” The game utilizes a damsel-in-distress trope that suggests women are weak and in need of male protection. Just like in every other game in the series, Princess Zelda is incapacitated and in need of rescue from the central character, Link. The repeated use of this sexist cliché helps to, as Sarkeesian says, “normalize extremely toxic, patronizing, and paternalistic attitudes.”

For a portion of the game’s plot, Zelda is represented as an imposing warrior. But, as Sarkeesian points out, she is only able to achieve this disguised as a man and she’s kidnapped within minutes of revealing her true identity.

Sure, Link is also at times injured or captured. At one point, for instance, he’s locked in a Gerudo jail cell. But, as Sarkeesian says, Link, and male protagonists in general, usually get themselves out of the situation. And that ability to overcome obstacles is integral to their development as heroic characters.

Link also rescues other female characters who arguably fall into damsel trope, such as Saria, a friend from his Kokiri childhood, and Ruto, princess of the aquatic Zoras.

The game’s representation of animals is best displayed in the idyllic Lon Lon Ranch, a small farm operated by a human father-daughter duo. Entering the location, “Epona’s Song,” a tranquil and nostalgic piece by composer Koji Kondo, plays in the background. The wistful choice in music isn’t surprising, given widespread yearning by industrialized human populations for a recently abandoned, romanticized pastoralism.

From the perspective of domesticated animals, agriculture of the past was a gentler prospect than the modern, factory-farm system. But for non-humans the pre-industrial farm, as symbolized by Lon Lon Ranch, was still a place of exploitation and violence, where their lives, in general, would be significantly shorter and more circumscribed than those of their nearest, wild cousins.

But in the game, domestication is portrayed as a mutually beneficial, voluntary arrangement. The anthropomorphized cows of Hyrule speak to Link, literally saying, “Have some of my refreshing and nutritious milk!” Of course depicting a relationship as anything like symbiotic when one party kills and eats the other, as well as the latter’s children, would be laughable if it weren’t so appalling.

On this 15th anniversary of the game’s release, I encourage readers to dust off their Nintendo 64 and return to Hyrule. Hike up Death Mountain. Swim in Lake Hylia. Explore the Lost Woods. “Ocarina” is a fantastic piece of art we can enjoy while being aware that, like so much other art, it has a lot of problems.

 

 

 

 

 

Also, I like this girl's take on things:

 

 

 

 

 

I always found Zelda as a "damsel" to be particularly odd. Like, Zelda is by no means helpless by any means and is more often than not equally as pivotal as Link....she's just not YOU, the player, so eventually there comes a point where you and her have done everything that needs to be done and the only way to advance the storyline while keeping drama high is for Ganondorf to forcefully hold her captive. That feels more like a way to advance the plot in a way that suits the gameplay (imagine if the entirety of every Ganon's Castle was an escort mission or if they had to code companions solely for that snippet)
   What's more, think of it from a storyline perspective. Half the time Ganon takes Zelda, it's not a "mwahahahaha I've taken ur GF and I will hurt her unless you save her!" No, it's a "yo I need all three of us to gain access to the Triforce, and I'm gonna make this happen." Link is the Triforce of COURAGE; it's easy to play him as a pawn by simply kidnapping her and waiting for him to come on his own free will. Zelda on the other hand is the Triforce of Wisdom, and were the tables turned, might think "MMMMMMMMMM dunno if charging into his castle to try and save Link is so smart, ijs!"

 

  It also blatantly ignores multiple iterations of Zelda which are anything but helpless. Wind Waker's Zelda is practically the opposite of this, and you'll struggle to name a modern Zelda game where Link takes down Ganon without her aid. Zelda always felt like an equal to me, never a "prize." FFS, she and Link don't even have a relationship going on, and I actually had this theory when I was a kid that Link was Zelda's sister in Ocarina of Time, seeing as how the Queen of Hyrule is non-existent while Link's (Hyrulian) mother is confirmed dead after fleeing with him to the Kokori Forest.

[Keyrock]

 

 

The greatest mistake this video's author makes is asking Ms. Sarkeesian to evaluate characters honestly and on their entire body of work and character facets.  As if that's ever going to happen.  It's a lot harder to spin a narrative without cherry picking and telling half-truths (or outright lying, as Anita has done on multiple occasions).

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

http://thespectacularspider-girl.tumblr.com/post/102919064149/representation-of-women-in-video-games-the-cause

 

An interesting article about a woman's perspective about double standard in video games.

Spectacular instead of Amazing? I'm not taking that seriously. [/sarcasm]

[Nakia]

http://thespectacularspider-girl.tumblr.com/post/102919064149/representation-of-women-in-video-games-the-cause

 

An interesting article about a woman's perspective about double standard in video games.

I like this article.     "Girls are sugar and spice and everything nice" is a myth perpetuated by society and unfortunately believed by many women.  If you missed my earlier post I am a woman and been around a long time.  Women are human and can be  Angels from heaven or demons from hell and everything inbetween.

[Darkpriest]

Hey, ths material is not particularly related to gaming, but I found this absurd by browsing some general search results on absurds on "femnizm".

 

It is related to the bill that passed in California, US at the end of September.

______________________________

"Yes means yes" is the first law in a US state to make the language of affirmative consent a central principle of school sexual assault policies.

The rule defines consent as "an affirmative, conscious and voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity."

 

Lawmakers say, however, that consent can be non-verbal, if it is unambiguous.

The aim is to improve the way that campuses deal with accusations of sexual assault, and to challenge the notion that victims of sexual crimes need to have resisted assault in order to have valid complaints.

 

The legislation also says that silence or a lack of resistance do not constitute consent. Under the bill, someone who is drunk, drugged, unconscious or asleep cannot grant consent.

______________________________

 

I do not mean to belittle the problem of real sexual assaults, but this is just some ridiculous idea... Soon perhaps you will have to get a written contract co-signed by a witness before having sex and overseen by a camera in the room, which makes sure that you will not do something not covered by the contract...

 

Are these people stupid or something? Things like this make me wish for the 3rd World War....

 

I am sure that the casual making out (kissing, gropping, etc.) in a bar or house party after having the some drink would be also under the rule of his bill, and it's even funnier when both sides can bounce back the ball, since both were drinking... also, what's the way of measuring that someone was intoxicated or not? blood samples taken before having sexual activities with the person of interest? Is a glass of wine too much? a beer? a bottle of vodka? what about people with higher tolerance or lower tolerance for alcochol?

 

I don't recall a situation in my life where I would first "kiss" any girl without the presence of alcochol... there always was either some fancy drink, or at least a couple of glasses of wine... you have sex when fully sobber when you know each other for some time, but the first contacts are usually made in presence of alcochol, because the social situations leading to opportunities of meeting someone and knowing someone better are usually linked to alcochol... the only exception is when a said person is a complete abstinent but these kind of people are a mariginal minority within the regular western society (i do not know such people personally and I am myself a person who does not drink much)...

 

People creating such laws need to really stop smoking crack and doing meth, cause their brain damage is affecting a lot of people...

 

So back on topic, any new twitter fights of SJW and GG over a cartoonish flesh flash?

Edited November 22, 2014 by Darkpriest

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

""Yes means yes" is the first law in a US state to make the language of affirmative consent a central principle of school sexual assault policies.

The rule defines consent as "an affirmative, conscious and voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity."

 

Lawmakers say, however, that consent can be non-verbal, if it is unambiguous.

The aim is to improve the way that campuses deal with accusations of sexual assault, and to challenge the notion that victims of sexual crimes need to have resisted assault in order to have valid complaints.

 

The legislation also says that silence or a lack of resistance do not constitute consent. Under the bill, someone who is drunk, drugged, unconscious or asleep cannot grant consent."

 

Someone who is drunk can not give consent? I suppose that means the few times I had sex with my ex while drunk I was being raped then.

[Namutree]

Someone who is drunk can not give consent? I suppose that means the few times I had sex with my ex while drunk I was being raped then.

I think the measure of how drunk you need to be will be pretty high. I assume the law is meant to deal with cases were the victim is effectively passed out. Such a case happened in the army a few years back if I recall correctly.

[Hurlshort]

It's not as complicated as you two make it out.  Don't take advantage of drunk people.  Your girlfriend is probably not going to wake up feeling like she was taken advantage of.

[Darkpriest]

 

Someone who is drunk can not give consent? I suppose that means the few times I had sex with my ex while drunk I was being raped then.

I think the measure of how drunk you need to be will be pretty high. I assume the law is meant to deal with cases were the victim is effectively passed out. Such a case happened in the army a few years back if I recall correctly.

 

 

Well I do not know the precise details of the bill and if it covers what is drunk, or is it the standard drunk as per limits to drive a car. If it is near pass out the state of drunk, then indeed we are talking about a nearly unconcious person, which then indeed is effectivly a sexual assault/rape, but if it is the same as in case of being qualified as intoxicated for the purposes of driving a car, then we have a rather stupid legal situation. Not to mention that by the letter of the law both people need to actively agree on each consequent step (kiss, grope, strip, etc.). No better way to kill the magic of the whole intimate situation. Following this rule to the letter, the sex will look like in a comedy with  Leslie Nielsen if both sides will want to avoid a potential accusation of sexual assault after they will break with each other...

 

I am all for making sure that the real sexual assault problem is resoved, but this is not the way to do it... This just gives  legal basis for a lot of moronic sues and can be more damaging than helpful

 

Here is the original article where I read about this. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29406138

Edited November 22, 2014 by Darkpriest

[Namutree]

It's not as complicated as you two make it out.  Don't take advantage of drunk people.  Your girlfriend is probably not going to wake up feeling like she was taken advantage of.

The details are always complicated.

 

Imagine your girlfriend video taped you and her having sex while she was somewhat intoxicated. The next day she would basically own you. She could go to the police and have you arrested for rape. So yes, how drunk is important. If a law can be exploited; it usually is.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Reading the text of the law, intoxication needs to be to the point of incapacitation. Not sure how being really drunk, but still conscious will be handled but I assume we will see soon enough.

 

Something I find troubling is proof of informed consent. With my ex I would often try to start sex in the morning or after a shower without talking first. If she didn't want to, she would hit me or tell me to **** off, but there were times we had sex without verbally agreeing. Not sure how it would hold up I'm court, but I could see someone who had a sexual encounter like this find themselves in legal trouble if the partner decided to raise issue.

[Keyrock]

It's not as complicated as you two make it out.  Don't take advantage of drunk people. 

It's not as simple as you may want to make it out to be considering that there is an entire industry (bars) built, in part, around the idea of people getting drunk and having sex.

[Darkpriest]

 

It's not as complicated as you two make it out.  Don't take advantage of drunk people. 

It's not as simple as you may want to make it out to be considering that there is an entire industry (bars) built, in part, around the idea of people getting drunk and having sex.

 

 

Remember that you have to make sure that the girl will now avidly and visibly nod in public and/or say yes "you can kiss me and put a hand on my butt" in a bar for college students or campus dorm/house party. Best if you can record it too!

Edited November 22, 2014 by Darkpriest

[Volourn]

"Under the bill, someone who is drunk, drugged, unconscious or asleep cannot grant consent."

 

So, both parties would be rapists by this definition if they drunk. Both the male and the female. The illogic here is beyond stupid.

[Hurlshort]

 

It's not as complicated as you two make it out.  Don't take advantage of drunk people.  Your girlfriend is probably not going to wake up feeling like she was taken advantage of.

The details are always complicated.

 

Imagine your girlfriend video taped you and her having sex while she was somewhat intoxicated. The next day she would basically own you. She could go to the police and have you arrested for rape. So yes, how drunk is important. If a law can be exploited; it usually is.

 

 

I guess another simple lesson would be don't stick your junk in crazy.  

[Namutree]

"Under the bill, someone who is drunk, drugged, unconscious or asleep cannot grant consent."

 

So, both parties would be rapists by this definition if they drunk. Both the male and the female. The illogic here is beyond stupid.

Is that how the bill is phrased exactly?

[Namutree]

 

 

It's not as complicated as you two make it out.  Don't take advantage of drunk people.  Your girlfriend is probably not going to wake up feeling like she was taken advantage of.

The details are always complicated.

 

Imagine your girlfriend video taped you and her having sex while she was somewhat intoxicated. The next day she would basically own you. She could go to the police and have you arrested for rape. So yes, how drunk is important. If a law can be exploited; it usually is.

 

 

I guess another simple lesson would be don't stick your junk in crazy.  

 

Lol. You may not know how crazy she is until it's too late. 

 

I don't have much faith in the competence of the state, but I suspect the intoxication level will be reasonable; if not the bill will be repealed after the first person is convicted of rape over a swig of beer.

Edited November 22, 2014 by Namutree