Women as background decoration (same video with clicky)
I have not finished the video but the first 5 minutes seem correct. Yes, video games have been trying to [over]sexualize women for as long as I can remember. The same can be said about movies too so it's not an exclusive case.
Though it's kinda ridiculous to not expect flirtatious and provocative representation in a strip club, either in video game or movie or reality.
Comment has been collapsed.
It is kind of weird how more and more games seem to have a stripclub/brothel level now. It didn't make much sense when she criticized Fallout New Vegas for being able to drag around bodies when you could strip men and drag their naked dead bodies around just as well.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thunderf00t's response to her first video: Part 1 Part 2 Part 3
I watched her first video, and I'm not going to give her more hits on another video. My father died when I was young, and I grew up with two sisters and a mother. Women objectify men just as much as men do to women, at least when they think men aren't looking. Feminism is just another fundamentalist ideology and shouldn't be taken seriously.
Comment has been collapsed.
No one is saying that men aren't also objectified. Just because feminism happens to focus on the way women are objectified, does not mean the qualifier of male objectification has to focused on as well. Would you criticize the NAACP for not also focusing on equal treatment/advancement of white people?
Comment has been collapsed.
Of course.
"From the ballot box to the classroom, the thousands of dedicated workers, organizers, leaders and members who make up the NAACP continue to fight for social justice for all Americans."
If their goal was just to repeat history with whites as slaves however...
Comment has been collapsed.
My point is, all academic and business incentives offered by the NAACP are geared toward individuals of color. Do you find it offensive or somehow improper that they do not offer the same opportunities or considerations for white individuals?
Comment has been collapsed.
NAACP claims to speak for all Americans (implying both whites and people of colour), whilst it acts only in favour of people of colour. If there was an attempt to create an institution offering the same services to whites, NAACP would argue that their agenda already covers that and would shut down the budding institution. Much like feminism is shutting down all kinds of male-only events under the pretext that their movement is a movement for 'equality' and that they provide enough space for discussion of male issues within their own movement (which is untrue, and even you have admitted that it focusses on women's issues).
Comment has been collapsed.
Holy shit. So both groups are unnecessary because everyone's already equal, right?
Seriously, no one is blaming WASP men (of which I am a part of btw) for their privileged position. However, if we choose to be ignorant of our own advantages and hand wave all opposing arguments and bodies, we are no better than those who established such privilege in the first place.
And feminism does stand for gender equality, it's as simple as that. Any large movement will have extremist elements to blame vast generalizations on-- MRAs, GLAAD, Conservatives, Liberals, etc. alike. It's extremely tiring when all of these groups constantly attempt to redefine an opposition's term or a word in order to hand wave the entire group or argument. It's a misuse of both their privilege and our own decency, because what is the point of devolving every conversation into the specifics on the definition of a term? It's a useless de-railing tactic that has constantly been employed by ignorance and only ends up dissolving a lot constructive discussion by burying it under a mountain of clarification bullshit.
Case in point, don't take your personal umbrage with Anita to be indicative of feminism as a whole. Nor the NAACP (as an administration) as the literal representation for the advancement of equality, for that matter.
Comment has been collapsed.
Equality can not be achieved through degradation or one-sided "empowerment".
This kind of movement got us "women quota" in leading position. You know who's gonna pay for that? Companies that need to fill position inadequately, and women who actually worked their way up, now not being respected for that because "quota". And the ones who got their jobs only through such means? Tools.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah dude, it sucks so much for us white guys now that we have to compete with other people. Seriously, you think every WASP man in a position of power for the last 100 years (America, for data's sake) was totally there by earned diligence and not an iota of favoritism and/or racial/gender preference?
Take a second to stop the "it's not my fault" routine and consider other perspectives.
Comment has been collapsed.
Please don't do that. My point was not that we don't need those movements. My point was that we do need their apparent opposites as well. Because being privileged does not mean that you can't have problems and should not mean that you may not discuss them.
I know that feminism claims to be a movement for equality, and I would even go as far as accept their female-exclusive quotas if they could demonstrate that there's discrimination at work and it should be countered. But I do have a problem with the fact that feminism - as a movement for gender equality - actively opposes all kinds of male discussion events. It's one thing to be a white male and be told, repeatedly, that 'we'll deal with those issues of male suicide, fatal job accidents, conscription, homelessness, family courts bias, and so on when we're done making sure that women don't feel discriminated against' (without actually making it clear when we're to expect that, but that's how the cookie crumbles I guess); but it's a wholly different kettle of fish to be actively silenced, with protests and fire alarms and violence and false rape allegations and what have you for just trying to have a talk about these issues on your own.
Comment has been collapsed.
And my point is that using isolated incidents of extremist elements to define a very large group is entirely problematic. MRAs and PUAs are beginning to experience this themselves.
Also, it's extremely unfair to invalidate an argument just because a pin-pointed solution isn't attached to the complaint. To say that you can't express outrage at injustice without an over-arching proposal for ideal change is against the entire idea of democratic discussion.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thanks for your calculated and thought-provoking contribution.
Comment has been collapsed.
You're not calling these nutjobs feminists - that's cool. They are calling themselves feminists; and I've yet to see the movement at large - and I mean the people in power; not the few lovely individuals (I guess including you) who not only claim that feminism means equality, but also live by that claim - condemn them or distance from them. Which is logical, because admitting that male issues do exist would mean diverting some part of the government funding towards tending to those issues; and feminism is mostly concerned with women's issues at the moment. It doesn't mean this extremist behaviour is the norm within the movement; but it does imply that this behaviour serves the movement's agenda in some way. Feminists don't have to burn down shelters for male victims of domestic abuse to undermine their claims for being an all-encompassing movement; they just don't seem interested in helping people like Earl Silverman to get funding for hosting one either. You list MRAs (what's with pick-up artists being listed as a movement?) as an opposing group - but aren't they working towards the same kind of equality as feminism, albeit from the other side? Aren't you supposed to consider MRAs feminists then? And yet even you, the pro-equality feminist, view them as someone who opposes you.
To be fair, they do oppose you. You're both fighting for a fixed sum of government money - so it's either they get to solve some of their issues, or you get to solve yours. One of the sides will get to the said 'equality' faster than the other; and I'm not quite convinced that they'll start pushing the inequality stick from the other end. Notice I'm not singling out either of the sides.
Comment has been collapsed.
feminism working for advancing the rights of females only - they don't give a s**t about man, they only see them as enemies and justify it by examples form ancient times where circumstances were different and woman were impotent to the survival of a colony/town/village (no woman=no increase in population)...yes today the situation is different but you cannot advocate for the rights of one group over the other.
Lets talk about double standard: when a man hits a woman then he will be bad guy but if a woman hit a man then the man must done something bad...
man considered in society as one who cannot control his sexual desires and women are pure....
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, yes, that sounds true and all, but the point that Doctorofjournalism was trying to make was that it's only extremist elements who do all that; and that the mainstream feminism is a fluffy ideology that will eventually get around to solving all that.
The mere fact that the feminism doesn't do anything about eradicating this sort of double-standard treatment doesn't show that it's the movement itself that's instituting these double standards. We may suspect that it does, via perpetuating certain myths about some inherent male aggressiveness, via blowing certain acts of violence done by men out of proportion and picturing them as display of misogyny, and so on - but this effect is not quantifiable, so the fluffy feminists could just as well shrug it all off as 'fringe feminism' and 'not all feminists are like that'. It is an objectively valid point you're making, though: it was feminism that introduced (and is still trying to push forwards) lenient standards of proof for alleged rape victims. The result? The actual rape statistics haven't moved anywhere; but all it takes now for a woman to ruin a man's life is to grab his hand and scream, 'Help, he's trying to rape me!' You'd think that a movement for gender equality would immediately jump in to solve this injustice, but somehow feminism finds the wage gap myth more appealing.
Comment has been collapsed.
So if I identify as a humanist does that make you more comfortable? Perhaps some even newer term that hasn't been tainted by rabid opposition or extreme proponents?
It's ridiculous to keep side-stepping the issue of true equality by bogging down the discussion with innane arguments over "ism" specificity and attempting to neuter an opponent's opinion by misdefining their identification. I don't care what I have to identify as to support gender equality, because I recognize the current social imbalance between both men and women.
The fact that certain people will take advantage or misrepresent a movement (feminist, MRA, conservatives and liberals alike) does not detract from the reality of the current imbalance. If you feel that this balance does not exist, and that women are truly treated equal to men in objectivity, opportunity, and understanding, then we fundamentally disagree. It's simply frustrating when you attempt to use the argument against corrupt activism to undermine the idea as a whole. Yes, there are shitty 'feminists' who do not promote equality. That does not mean the idea of equality is less intrinsic to feminism or that the action for equality is no longer required.
Comment has been collapsed.
I thought we were talking about the mainstream feminism here, not engaging in some kind of kitchen warfare between us as individuals. I mean, yeah, that would solve exactly one problem: if I were to identify myself as an anti-feminist, and you claimed to be a feminist, you'd then have to ask, 'What kind of feminism are you rallying against?' And I'd tell you that it's this or that kind of feminism. And you'd then go, 'Oh, well, I'm not like that.' And I'd go, 'Well, okay then. I'll move on bashing the x-1 remaining feminists.' I agree, that's as ridiculous as it sounds.
You keep claiming that everything I'm ascribing to mainstream feminism is actually some sort of extremism and is in no way indicative of the movement at large. Well, I am willing to submit to that. It is true that I do believe that we've reached the equality of opportunity, that a white woman can get any job she likes and get paid the same amount of money as (or more than) a white man of equal experience and education. There are independent studies that support that. She may be viewed as eye candy at first, I'm not denying that, but it will always ultimately come down to the question whether she can get the company that hires her a certain amount of money via her skills in the long run. I do believe that a white woman can live her life any way she wants without being forced into a particular role by anyone at any point in her life. No one will force a woman to have kids, or not have kids, or get a better paying (but more dangerous/hazardous) job, or be a stay-at-home mother; there are ways around any of that. But I do concede that it may be due to the fact that I don't know something. Now, then, could you tell me what mainstream feminism is fighting for in your opinion? The immediate goals, I mean, the legislation that it's lobbying for. What rights and opportunities do you believe there are that a white male does have, and a white female does not?
As for equality of objectivity and equality of understanding - I've no idea what that means. If you're referring to the fact that women are viewed as sex objects and that we need to solve that - well, yes, but I'd rather you went with 'people' instead of 'women'. Because to stop people from viewing every attractive person as a potential sex object (someone to impress, to get to know, and in the case of biological cul-de-sacs of both sexes - to rape) you have to change the way our mating ritual works - outlaw sex before marriage, promote the idea that it's the woman who has to 'conquer' the man, make everyone join some kind of a government-funded OkCupid, and so on (I'm only being half facetious, some of this may actually work). There may be inequality in how many women are viewed as sex objects versus the number of men who are viewed as such; but it's not realistically quantifiable. You may 'feel' that's the case, but it does nothing to solve the problem.
Comment has been collapsed.
I've posted it in the forum before, but there's a great doc that addresses a lot your sticking points. It's called Miss Representation and you can currently stream it on Netflix or PPV online. The crew is currently working on a documentary about male masculinity, I also posted the trailer in this thread earlier.
At work and on my phone at the moment, but that's my initial suggestion as to your post. Yes, we fundamentally disagree on the current state of gender equality.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'll give it a look, but from the description is sounds like the film is about women being 'not encouraged' to do certain things and take certain positions, and not about them being prevented from doing all that. Are you sure that film will actually answer my question? The one about the equality of opportunity and the rights?
Because I know there's a lot of stereotyping going on. Hell, the government needs all the drones it can get - both in the kitchen and in the trenches willing to die for whatever bulls--t cause a bunch of billionaires have invented for them to fight for. I know that. It sucks, and it should be eradicated. But does the film display how we actually - actively - take away certain opportunities from women? Does it show how exactly they are underprivileged?
Comment has been collapsed.
The complaint that media over-sexualizes women forgets that media over-sexualizes men, too.
How many video games can you name that feature a fat slobby out-of-shape weak guy as anything other than comic relief? No, they're all "manly" men with chiseled abs, huge biceps, embodying "manly" qualities like strength and endurance and so on that most men in real life don't accurately reflect. Even elderly men are usually portrayed as being badass elders without any health issues that aren't "sexy".
My point isn't that we need to portray men more realistically, it's that complaining that women are over-sexualized is either hypocritical or totally blind. Everyone is over-sexualized in media, it's just somehow only a problem when it's done to women because modern feminists are hypocrites.
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually, I'd claim that there are a lot more "fat slobby out-of-shape weak guy"s starring as main roles in films and media (and they usually get the "super hot out of his league chick") than there are in female contrast. Jonah Hill and Seth Rogen are two actors who fit this stereotype. While women of such shape and sexual nature, like Melissa McCarthy in Bridesmaids, constantly accentuate their non-sexual appeal in every scene. Whereas the Seth Rogen example is for him to appear as a "normal guy," when McCarthy is used to exemplify everything about her is either wrong, disgusting, or a joke.
Comment has been collapsed.
A lot of both men and women are what I (and tvtropes) like to call "hollywood homely." Even the ones who are supposed to look "normal" end up looking attractive by real-world standards even if they look homely next to supermodels. Those who aren't usually end up being the brunt of jokes - the comic relief - the funny fat guy. And an un-attractive guy ending up with a hot woman is noteable specifically because "she's out of his league" - tell me, is that really just objectifying women or is that also objectifying men to say their appearance dictates who they're "supposed" to go out with?
I haven't seen Bridesmaids because I hate romantic comedies, so I can't comment about that specific movie. But if this is "normal guy," normal guy is still appearing reasonably fit and attractive, unshaven but in a rugged sense rather than a messy one, and so on. And, not unlike the over-sexualization of women, the over-sexualizxation of men is ridiculously prevalent in video games relative to TV or movies. You can call the "macho space marine" stereotype an exaggeration of what a masculine man is supposed to be, and he's the protagonist of pretty much every AAA game made today.
Comment has been collapsed.
Comments disabled. I see you feel very confident about what you're doing. Or you realize that the people who would actually support this senselessness are far less than those who would hate on it and call you names. Either way, good job! Glad to see the kickstarter money being put to um... good use?
Comment has been collapsed.
Totalbiscuit disabled the comments mostly because he could not take it. Honestly I would too if I was him or Anita Sarkeesian since some of those who could do that would probably be the ones being criticized in the video.
Comment has been collapsed.
yeah and her picture on wikipedia was changed into a photoshopped of her engaging in sexual act (by hacker, not wiki staff 'course). There was also a flash game giving you the option of being able to punch her into pulp.
Great work internet, you will NEVER stop surprising me!
Comment has been collapsed.
Anita Sarkeesian is the worst thing that happened to feminism in last 20 years or so. She's being more sexist and ignorant than most vile and chauvinistic men that you could think of
Comment has been collapsed.
This is somewhat true. I actually couldn't believe she put in the human-trafficking scene from Watch_Dogs. That was pure stupid. The purpose was to show how evil the characters were, not to include women as "sex objects." They're literal sex objects, not ones for the men playing the game.
Comment has been collapsed.
*Clears throat* Cathy Brennan *Cough*
Oh, excuse me. I think I might be coming down with a cold or something. Nevermind, carry on.
Comment has been collapsed.
Jesus, I browsed her channel. She has a video that criticizes the "damsel in distress" trope. This is beyond retarded. Girl may want to go and read up on Aleksei Losev and Vladimid Propp or something. Maybe she will stop producing this nonsense then, who knows...
Comment has been collapsed.
...and fuck those men who whine about being domestically abused by their hubbies. How dare they, they do not have a real problem!!
(just continue the sarcastic train)
Comment has been collapsed.
https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/476045884195475456
Someone should explain her a thing or two about French Revolution
Comment has been collapsed.
Kat, you're probably too young to understand any of this or what Propp and Losev wrote about, so why don't you wait a few years, read up and then come back, with a better understanding of why centuries of collected human knowledge indicate she is wrong. I don't mean to say the world isn't full of brutish, nasty men. I'm just saying you can't sprout out of nowhere, get people to fund your videos and then make grand statements as though you're the pinnacle of knowledge concerning tradition, custom, history, folklore, habit, psychology and the collective unconscious.
Comment has been collapsed.
Reading may not be a technique you've quite discovered yet but it can do wonderful things for you, I promise. You must understand that in order for us to have a common ground to argue, we must be on the same level. Sadly, we're not, so arguing is pointless.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not saying you can't or shouldn't disagree with her and what she has to say, that's completely fine. I'm just saying try to be constructive about it, give your opinion without falling back on insulting people (especially without actually knowing anything about them.)
Comment has been collapsed.
"She is wrong." Wow! After five years of study under qualified and published professors and tutors, I finally learnt that your critical opinions about media can be objectively wrong. Thank you, Curratum, for achieving what my professors and tutors could not.
Seriously. She's not saying that the Damsel trope doesn't exist, she just has a critical stance on its use in games.
Comment has been collapsed.
She has a critical stance that is grounded in absolutely nothing. After going on and on about the historical development of the trope and giving examples with games, she suddenly veers into "women as a possession that's been stolen from the protagonist". It's an 8-bit arcade game, woman. How about no? When you back up your feminist statements with phrases such as "I've heard it said that..." Solid research there!
Comment has been collapsed.
Initially I was just trying to point out how ridiculous it looks (to me anyway) when people immediately turn to insulting the creator of content rather than sticking to debating the content itself. Which he uh, responded to by insulting me. Sooo yeaah, that.
Comment has been collapsed.
There's a fine line between simply stating an opinion and making up "facts" to underline an invalid point. She's another Tom Cruise of feminism and only hurts actually "empowered" women who simply do what it takes (anyone) to get where they want. She's like the "casual" that has been moaning WoW down to meaningless claiming it was "unfair" people actually had to play while the actual casual players enjoyed exploring the world, leveling and questing.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, she has a point. The thing is, I don't care.
Comment has been collapsed.
Most of that games are my favorites and i think she has some serious issues...first world problems.
Comment has been collapsed.
Comment has been collapsed.
No i get it and iam happy that i dont live in a world, she wants it to be! :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, sex sells, as long as that's the case, half (or completely) naked women will show up in all kinds of media.
Here in Germany, boobs can be seen 24/7 on TV during shower gel commercials shrugs
There are even commercials about lotions to reduce Candidal Vulvovaginitis ( funny google translation ) at the afternoon - now explain that to your child!
Comment has been collapsed.
Honestly who cares about sexism or anything in video games. It's a fucking game for christ sake. Sexualize men in games all you want if you makes you feel better. Don't ruin games because of feminism. Limit that shit to real world.
Comment has been collapsed.
Aren't men alerady sexualized? Buffed up men in tight clothes being badass and whatnot. Did anyone asked how does that makes us feel?
Comment has been collapsed.
It's because the argument is always one sided and as men our opinion doesn't amount to anything
Comment has been collapsed.
So full disclosure, not American and only did like a month on this in year 11 history, but, my understanding of the civil rights movement real quick.
You had Martin Luther King preaching complete equality for everybody, wanting everybody to get along, and you had Malcolm X, an extremist that insisted that blacks and whites could never be equal because blacks were in fact better than whites.
Now unfortunately, even though these two didn't get along or really agree on anything aside from the fact that change of some kind was needed, some misinformed people saw the extremist actions of a few and decided that everybody associated with promoting civil rights in any form felt that exact same way, like they had some kind of hive mind thing going on.
See what I'm getting at here? Just like #notallmen are rapists, #notallfeminists hate men or desire to sideline them.
Comment has been collapsed.
Uh, I guess? I don't really know much about US holidays, I spent 3 months in Boston last year but that's the extent of it, but it would probably make sense if so, they were both leaders that did a lot of good and wanted what (they thought) was best for their people, but as far as equality goes, MLK did more than Malcolm X...essentially because Malcolm X didn't want equality, just for whites to be the "lesser" race.
Which, yeah, to bring it back on topic, there are plenty of angry, vocal women who feel like they've been pushed around too long to ever be "equal" and they want to castrate all men or send them to starve on an island or whatever, but that doesn't represent the views of all feminists.
Comment has been collapsed.
Still, exactly this kind is the topic here.
I do not oppose equality and females providing their perspective and input. I do however oppose extremist bottom-feeding lazy white trash preying on white knights to pay their bills while calling out the very behavior that feeds them. She's hurting the cause she pretends to be hers. She couldn't care less about women or equality. She's just a whore who doesn't want to sell her body.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh, my message was directly aimed at the generalisation of "feminism" in this thread, not a defence of her specifically, I have no real opinion on her, this is the first I've heard of her. I do agree completely that people often hurt the cause they're trying to support by being misinformed, overzealous or just plain stupid.
Comment has been collapsed.
+1 this
It has become all too common a tactic for groups to simply mis-define their opposition as a substitute for actual argument.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not because you're a man, but because your opinion differs from theirs, that your opinion doesn't matter to them.
Trust me, they hate women who disagree with them too.
Comment has been collapsed.
Don't worry, feminism is a 'movement for equality' (that's what the dictionary says, you can't argue with a dictionary!), so it will deal with sexualisation of men too. Eventually. Maybe. When they're done with more pressing matters like, you know, quotas for women in the government and corporate management, outlawing underwhelming sex as rape, and shutting down all kinds of events involving discussion of male sexualisation.
Comment has been collapsed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iARHCxAMAO0
skip to 3:50 for some more examples of glorious modern feminism
Comment has been collapsed.
"Gamers get hella uncomfortable over male sexuality too. Can you imagine a 'good male character who just happens to be wearing sexually exploitative outfits because he’s ok with his masculinity?' Constantly has the camera pan lovingly over his asscrack and firm glutes, and big ole dangly ballsack that is totes sweaty from all this MMA and soldiering. Time to hit the showers, and do you, personally, think it’s ok to have a long slow pan up the dude’s package (indiscreetly hidden in a jock of course), to his chiseled physique and erect nipples (pierced). He’s not even a Bond-esque confident man, he’s basically a weird Bowie caricature that’s constantly having near-dickslips in every single cinematic as the completely nonsexualized female characters do their business of being gruff and shooting dudes and advancing the plot. Finally, at the end he falls in love (out of nowhere) and/or is killed by the big baddie."
Comment has been collapsed.
I think she was supposed to fight against (supposed) tropes in portrayal of women in video games, and thus at least attempt to do something meaningful, no? This is just finger wagging at this point. She is arguing that women are put into some video games as inconsequential background objects. Okay. They are. Is this exclusive to women? No. Is this done predominantly to women? No. The majority of people you see in real life are inconsequential and could be just as well painted on cardboard cutouts. Why is this suddenly a problem? Is she arguing that we should not portray women as inconsequential under any circumstances? Is she arguing that there should be fewer instances of this in video games? If so, can she actually articulate why?
I can't stand agenda-pushing far-fetched examples she gives in her video. 'Look,' she says, 'in racing games the camera would stop to accentuate certain body parts of the woman.' Hold on there, lassie. First off, that's how women dress in the street racing culture. That's how they choose to dress, with a distinct goal of being looked at and admired (that's their understanding of admiration; so whilst I'm not a fan of this quasi-exhibitionism, I'm not judging). That's part of that culture. It's not 'misogyny', it's not 'patriarchy', and it's not a 'boys club'. That's how people of either sex find their enjoyment in that culture. Now, replace 'camera does this' and 'camera does that' with 'woman dresses' - 'Notice how the woman dresses to accentuate certain body parts.' Is her point then that the game should have done without the scant clothing as part of the culture in question? Or that the camera should have not accentuated the same body parts the women's clothing accentuates? If that's her whole argument - the same old 'I can dress however the f--k I want and it's your fault for looking at the body parts I'm drawing your attention to!' - then congratulations, she is now the prime candidate for Stutter of the Year 2014 award. And even then, that would make those women less of a background object... how, exactly?
Comment has been collapsed.
This is the internet..most men see some boobs and become the ultimate whiteknight..no matter what that women look like or what she is doing.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'd ply to say that people who label others something as inane as "Social Justice Warriors" are garbage. Fuck you for being an insensitive ass-- using the term "retarded" derogatorily and attempting to hand wave social movements (as if being an activist is a bad thing).
Disagree with her views, sure, but trying to outcast label people as "SJW" is beyond boring; it's the lowest of the low. Here you are insulting someone for having a point of view and publicizing it, you know the whole point of social discussion. Where's your contribution, Dillon? Oh that's right, you're somehow "above" any and all social discussion because you can label anyone with conviction as "SJW." Seriously, get lazier. I'm sure you'd label Martin Luther King Jr. or Winston Churchill a "retarded SJW" too. Wake the fuck up
Comment has been collapsed.
Sarkeesian was proven to attempt to scam people. As well as several other things. She did not start disabling comments till then. So the excuse about the comments is laughable at best.
According to her, everyone who is not Asian is racist to people who are Asian. All males are sexist ( but even more so when it comes to Asians, no joke you should really look at the junk she attempts to shell out there.. and yes she makes money off this junk )
She another one of the vocal "feminists extremest" that do nothing but make the feminist movement look bad. Sadly almost all of the vocal ones in today's age are like that. They are very much braindead and make you feel like you are loosing brain cells just listening to them.
Comment has been collapsed.
These 2 sentences got stuck in my head, "players are often permitted to knock out, pick up and throw around a FEMALE body", correct me if I'm wrong but the last time I checked you can do that to a male body as well.Also "some games reward this kind of behavior by having murdered women drop bundles of cash for the player to collect", a murdered men will also drop bundles of cash.The way she said it, it sounds like "Games encourage you to kill women and will reward you for that, you will not get any reward for murdering men".She is spreading misinformation and should at least tell the whole story and not half of it.
I'm sorry for my poor English.
Comment has been collapsed.
Can you kidnap male prostitutes instead of paying them for sex in Red Dead Redemption? (I know it's only one of her examples, it's just the only one I haven't actually played at all)
Just to be super clear btw, I agree completely that she could have made note of the games where you can do the same to men, I'm just wondering about that one specifically.
Comment has been collapsed.
LOL yes. because the one thing we stress in video games is REALISM
Comment has been collapsed.
Again to be super clear, I know nothing about that game and was genuinely asking. All I knew was cowboys, and gay cowboys were certainly a thing
You make a fair point about (overt) male prostitutes though, now I've looked it up and seen it was set in 1911. Can you kidnap guys in that manner at all?
Comment has been collapsed.
You're not actually using one movie (which may or may not be in the right setting) to prove your point, are you? Cause, y'know, stereotypes
Comment has been collapsed.
I knew nothing about the game aside from cowboys, so I didn't know if it was the right setting or not (not at all for the record, it's set about 50 years later for starters), I was just curious if it was like Fable. I didn't have a point, just a question.
Comment has been collapsed.
"Can you kidnap male prostitutes instead of paying them for sex in Red Dead Redemption?"
No. Because that's not a trope of any type of western movie, be it serious, spaghetti, or otherwise. Which, y'know, Red Dead Redemption was a take on. Also, that's a completely optional thing that if you were witnessed doing by townsfolk, you'd get shot at. So it's not like they held a hoedown as you tied her to the tracks, slinging sexual slurs and slapping pigs. (That's what they do at hoedowns, right?)
Comment has been collapsed.
See, that's part of the problem (and it's not fair to anyone): She is banking on some people not being familiar with the games she's discussing, so that her half-truths and misleading assertions will fly under the radar.
She talks about killing prostitutes in GTA for money, but leaves out that you can kill ANY pedestrian in GTA for money. I'd argue that, within the game, it at least makes more sense to kill a prostitute that you know is holding money, whereas killing a random pedestrian for giggles is worse.
Want to know who I targeted in GTA: San Andreas? Drug dealers. Any player worth their salt knew that the drug dealers were not only carrying more cash than virtually any other NPC, they also usually had a pistol you could grab - and the dealers were ALL men. But that wouldn't fit into her purposely narrow portrayal of events.
She talks about stripping dead women and dragging them around in Fallout: New Vegas, but isn't honest enough to mention that, since you can do the exact same thing to male corpses, there is ZERO inherent sexism in it. And, before anyone asks: The male and female undergarments in the game are virtually identical and both are thoroughly un-sexy, so it's not like there's some extra titillation factor that rewards one for stripping the women.
And, everyone make sure not to mention the elephant in the room: She's harping on how bad it is to kill, loot, and disrespect the corpse of a woman... when the sane complaint is that someone would do that to anyone, regardless of what gonads they happen to possess. Tsk tsk.
Her arguments are so paper-thin that she has to rely on keeping back this kind of information. She has to use misleading claims, withholding of information, and in many cases the listener's unfamiliarity with the subject matter, in order to seem as though she might actually have a sound argument. If her argument is sound, she should be able to support her claims without being misleading and using lies of omission.
In the meantime, she's stealing other people's game footage, without giving them credit. I wouldn't be at all surprised, based on those things, if she also hadn't played all the games she uses to try and prove her points.
I'm all for equality... but I'm also for the truth. Lying about the world around you, in order to try and sell your fallacious arguments as fact, is not a step in the right direction - not for women, not for anybody.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's pretty much normal for her. Its called confirmation bias. She finds what she's seeking out, rather than what is actually happening. She's a click-baiting, professional troll. She doesn't see people getting murdered, just women getting murdered.
Comment has been collapsed.
Fun fact: aren't critics supposed to be experienced professionals in their field of criticism, having contributed to it and, if applicable, done profound research on it, being critics only for the sake of providing a measure to coming generations?
I rather see her as "too lazy to do something on her own" so she gets paid to do a little blabber on other people's work without trying to contribute noteworthy. Or will we see research papers that can withstand an actual peer review and will lead to progression in their respective fields? I doubt it.
Comment has been collapsed.
"too lazy to do something on her own" becomes even more relevant once you learn that most of the content in her 4 videos so far has a bunch of ripped of material and video clips from other youtubers, without even crediting them or anything
Comment has been collapsed.
I know, I watched about double the time of her videos in critical response from multiple sources (including women) clarifying how she rips examples out of context, actually betting on her audience now knowing the games at all.
It's like saying Star Wars is a black power movie that ends in white supremacy after all.
Comment has been collapsed.
There is a saying in my country "svaka para imaju svoju budalu" which is something like "there is a buyer/customer for everything"
Like, here is an article which explains how every form of sex, even PIV, is rape
Now scroll down to the comments and be amazed at how many people are agreeing with it.
Once that gets through you, you can see what Anita really is, nothing short of a good businesswoman taking advantage of gullible people and making money of them. And that is fine. Like i said above "svaka para ima svoju budalu"
But what really grinds my gears is the ammount of irreversible damage which she's causing to feminism. If you are for equality and equal treatment of all genders, you are an equalist. I am too. Everyone are.
But the thing is, in every movement or cause you'll find a handful of idiots who are just taking things to extreme, being batshit insane and only ruining it for everyone while claiming it's "for the cause" and most of the time it's what they actually believe. In short, these people are nothing but walking jokes hiding their bitterness and hatred of men behind a thin veil of "feminism". But by far the most hilarious part of the entire thing is that they are currently doing more harm to actual feminism and its goals than any other source with the catastrophically bad PR they give to it everywhere they exist
Comment has been collapsed.
Good point, edited. The damage has been done already so much already that the other term is nothing but a joke nowadays and a subject of internet memes
Comment has been collapsed.
you think youve seen all the irrational nonsense then you click a link to find obviously rational intelligent people who have a starting point thats utterly ridiculous your gonna keep me up for hours with that link worrying how doomed we are as a species if thats a serious opinion held by people
Comment has been collapsed.
Also possible. I tend to believe a majority of people is not born filth, however, so I think they're just trying to do what many teachers/professors do: give what they can while they're too old/tired to try and keep pace in the constant race of progress.
Comment has been collapsed.
^ and there you have it folks
this is completely 100% accepted humor today
"OH IT'S JUST A JOKE, I WAS JOKING GUYS"
Do you get the real joke?
Comment has been collapsed.
So it's accepted satire or sarcasm then?
That would still be exactly the point.
Comment has been collapsed.
Satire is too complex for people to understand today
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't. I simply think that's the response he would come back with if called out on his comment.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hey i just dont understand that stupid womens, that every day scream about feminism, theyre like "oh im a girl i cant do that" and when you tell them "ok ill do that" and they "hey feminist, what do you think i cant do anything" and then im like "woah!!!". This video is 10/10 stupid, if we replace women by "black people" how will you call that racism? and so you can do bad things to white chars, oh this is fine. Hey its easy to understand why there are so much "man" in videogames because of 100 girs, 2 care about what they see in videogames. And to the developers is more expensive make new women figures, voices, etc etc...
When i see a women that dosent like something in a game, i say "just dont play it". Bcoz now we start of feministm and goes after that, some dude will ask "hey why the main character is not gay?". This is goin to hell. For me if the devs want to put women as posible character like in gta, i dont care, let it be, but if they just made a "male" character so, im sorry.
This video is 100% crazy becoz you can do the same things to other NPC would it be male or female, like in deus ex, hitman, gta, and more.. do you see somethig bad?
Another thing, i saw she shows a lot of pole dancers and stripers, so what?????????? women dance in reale life !! i pesonally have 2 strip bars outside my town a who cares that there are womens dancing, thats their job.
Sorry 4 my eng.Seeya
Comment has been collapsed.
Comment has been collapsed.
As a small, undeveloped hill i find you joke offensive and insulting. Not every hill are strong enough to grow as big as mountain. I can't believe you would even joke about this, disgusting
Comment has been collapsed.
Most of her examples are out of context and misinformed, like a few days ago when she was complained about the Rainbow Six E3 demo using female hostages as helpless flags that needed to be protected by men, even though there are also male hostages in the game and female members of the swat team. In a game you can kill hundreds of male NPC's but kill one female NPC and it is somehow specifically trying to target violence against women. Also of course strippers and escorts will be sexualised that is their job, the fact that there are less male examples of this is probably because they really just aren't as common.
Don't get me wrong there are many games like Duke Nukem and Ride To Hell:Retribution that just objectify women for the sake of it and for a few cheap jokes, but she is highly exaggerating and stretching her points to an insane degree. These types of people enjoy being "victimized" and being at the center of attention.
Comment has been collapsed.
Anita pls, stop trying to get more views on your shitty videos.
Seriously though, just stop giving people like her any form of attention. They crave it, they need it and most people happily give it to her because she knows how to rustle your jimmies.
Comment has been collapsed.
6 Comments - Last post 3 minutes ago by Warriot
17 Comments - Last post 29 minutes ago by Acojonancio
24 Comments - Last post 29 minutes ago by Fluffster
25 Comments - Last post 35 minutes ago by magicmase
70 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by Reidor
1,772 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by AKFalcon
54 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by pizzahut
4 Comments - Last post 6 minutes ago by VahidSlayerOfAll
61 Comments - Last post 21 minutes ago by moemustaine
163 Comments - Last post 29 minutes ago by Fluffster
686 Comments - Last post 50 minutes ago by Cruse
29 Comments - Last post 51 minutes ago by Prosac
7 Comments - Last post 55 minutes ago by Lugum
1 Comments - Last post 1 hour ago by SkeetSurfer
Any thoughts on the new video?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZPSrwedvsg
Comment has been collapsed.