No, I get that.

But It doesn't matter if its Catwoman or Lara Croft, those are just the examples used for consistency sake between the video and the response.

What I said about Lara Croft can be applied to any female character in a video game from Jade in Beyond good and Evil, to Nilin in Remember Me. No one plays the game to stare at their ass, if you try to do that, you'll die, because your not paying attention to all the enemies, or the jumps you have to make, etc. etc. If game devs wanted you to stare at their ass, then they would make the game beatable by just staring at their ass.

It really ties into the same kind of argument as the whole "DoA girls objectify women because they wear skimpy clothing" thing. Sure, you COULD make that argument, if you totally ignore that DoA constantly portrays all their female characters as being super badass world tournament level fighters, many of them who also have won tons of awards in various scholarly pursuits, and are shown to be able to beat the crap out of any guy. Yeah total objectification there, girls being shown as being on-par, or better, then men in all subjects.

The same can be said for

-Lara Croft: Master of hand to hand combat, proficient in weaponry of all types, one of the smartest people in the world who has like 3000 encyclopedias worth of knowledge on ancient cultures, beat the [censored] out of armies of mercs who are near exclusively all men.

-Jade: Master of martial arts, the staff, top tier journalist who manages to outwit armies of men and aliens to reveal the truth.

-Nilin: also a master of hand to hand combat, beats the crap out of armies of men, manages to take down a massive world wide system of memory manipulation.

and Catwoman, Bloodrayne, Samus, Peach, etc. etc. the list goes on.

And that's not even getting into how all of these games show men who DO ogle those character's bodies as being slimy, scummy, unlikeable, [censored]s, who get the crap beat out of them, or straight up killed, for being that kind of person.

Anita's point only has validity if you totally ignore EVERYTHING else that defines the character, and makes up the game, and then try to boil it down to a singular part of their body. But thats true of every point Anita has made, its only valid if your try to simplify it down to JUST that aspect of the character.

Agree, then look at FO4 caracter in combat armor and the gronan outfit

On the other hand in skyrim I mostly wore robes even if forsworn gear looks good an an khajiit, running around naked in the snow looks stupid

I think Batgirl in Arkham Knight should have been showcased in place of (or at least alongside) Catwoman. Unlike Catwoman she does have a cape which instead seems to try really hard to not obscure the butt, which really drives home the point much harder of how ridiculous it is.

good point, what male characters have been designed for women? I'm probably wrong, but I do remember lots of female gamers I know sure fancied Dante from Devil May Cry.

Getting angry at this woman is pointless, she is just an attention seeker with no clue what she is talking about, the best thing you can do is ignore her.

Her opinion is invalid anyway, a real feminist would not be so militant about it.

well she's upsetting people, so that there says there's some validation hahaha.

I had to really think back on that one...

I can't help thinking of that https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZ5cMLyUxMo. They're quite something. Except where his bum is concerned, where they're quite nothing.

Yeah, that's the outfit. I'm looking forward to zombies wearing disco chaps and over-sized hats in the near future.

Not being a "fan" of miss Sarkesian, I can guess what her gripes are.

It's a video game. Men (and some women) objectfiy everything about a person they are attracted to. Eat a hot dog. Lick your lips. Drink a soft drink. Yawn. Jump for joy. Bend over to pick up some trash. Someone, somewhere is objectifying you.

Then you have "real life" people who try to be objectified. They dress revealingly. They plaster on make-up to hide "imagined defects." They spend hours on hair trying to catch attention.

Don't want to be objectified? Don't leave the house. If there is a body part, someone somewhere has a "thing" for it. It is how we humans think.

As I said before: It's a damn video game. (Or movie, or book, or magazine, or whatever.) Want respect? Act with respect. No amount of "rules" will change that. NONE.

PS: If something bugs you, why rain on others' parade? Nobody has to do anything they are uncomfortable with. Nobody.

Without going into detail and in an effort to keep this highly forum censored, let's just say I respectfully disagree with almost everything Sarkeesian says on the count of the fact she generalises and stereotypes male gamers and spins games that aren't misogynistic as misogynistic games.

That said, I don't have this problem because I don't play as women unless forced to. But when I do have female companions and I have the option to dress them up, I prefer them looking battle ready. Armourkinis don't cut it with me.

Well I don't really see it. Having a camera focus on the ass probably is stupid (though in Lara Croft's case it was necessary to have the full body visible for timing platforming jumps, which you don't need in third person shooters). I just don't think that seeing someone in a sixual light makes people think less of them. Especially not for videogame characters, where you're unlikely to care about the character regardless of its appearance.

I generally pursue and purchase games with female protagonists and avoid the ones with revealing clothing. Over half of my Steam library consist of female protagonist games. Mad Max(ine) of Life is Strange is the coolest video game girl ever!

Well, a certain amount of that is biological and not done consciously. When a person sees another person that they find attractive, there is a sixual response in the brain that's totally involuntary. This response can/will trigger thoughts that some would consider objectification of that person, and I think it's unrealistic to knock people for that. Criticizing men for having a sixual response to women is a bit like criticizing someone that really wants a sandwich for being hungry. Marketing departments have been aware of this since marketing has been a thing, and there probably isn't a whole lot we can do to convince them not to capitalize on it.

That said, we can encourage people to be mature and not allow these feelings to push them to the point of outward disrespect. There's no defeating the biology, but as thinking beings, we do have the power to handle said feelings appropriately and not lose sight of the fact that the people we find physically attractive are...people. It's a slippery slope, though. six is part of what we are as organisms, and repression of that aspect of us doesn't really help us to be better people, IMO. I think there's a middle ground somewhere between a complete absence of sixuality and treating women like sixy meat.

TLDR;

I think she makes some valid points, but I also think there's some exaggeration and lack of understanding there too.

And Thunderf00t delivered -https://youtu.be/ex-YkONJLOE

This triggered me.

She's mad cause she couldn't see Batman's butt? She definitely tried! and tried... and tried...

http://www.vhnd.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Caption_This_Chaps.jpg

There's a new generation of "feminists" out there that thrive on misandry and victim shaming.


It's blatantly obvious in somr areas, for example, German assault victims being called racist for racially identifying their attackers in a situation where a racial identification would help catch perps.


It makes real feminists dodge the movement. It's embarrassing. That person in the article is one of those.

I say lets not have any human-like figure in games or movies ever again and then lets sit back and watch what the feminists come up with next

@Sakiri - Yeah, it′s atrocious. I recently read that 200 cops had to stand down in the face of 800 angry men and basically just let them do what they want. Immigration? In military terms that′s an invasion, plain and simple

I think this is thematically relevant, https://youtu.be/er44WfcaOl4?t=6m50s.

I am not a fan of Anita, I will leave it at that. Things like this are simply a non-issue...

As far as the armor-kini thing, it really depends on the character for me. If I am going to play a two-handed, heavy armor warrior focused female in Skyrim, I am going to pick the armor that both visually and statistically offers the best protection. If I am going to play a rogue-like character, I might turn on a few skimpy armor models, with the idea that this character might use their sixuality as a tool to avoid conflict or turn odds in their favor.

Sigh* If only the AI and mechanics were up to that level.

Alright, back on topic - I don't know why a thread about portrayal of female rear ends needs a sidebar about immigration policy, but if this thread is going to remain open that silliness needs to stop.

You ask me (and I said I'd stay out of this but apparently I'm a liar and a hypocrite Blame Sakiri for bringing in off-topic politics and bringing me back to the thread,) it comes down to bridge mix. I like bridge mix - it's a got a bit of everything and it's all covered in chocolate. The right bridge mix is hard to find, though. You don't want too many caramels in there or your jaw gets tired from all the chewing, but you need some chewy bits or it's not the same. I think in a healthy society you need all manner of games. It's not about picking apart every individual game, but rather the balance of the industry as a whole. If I say there's too many chewy pieces in this bridge mix, that doesn't mean we need to eliminate all caramels or nougat from the bridge mix. And then saying "well caramel is supposed to be chewy" is missing the point. We don't need to inspect each and every piece of candy in the bag to determine if each individual piece is too chewy, because that's not really at the heart of the problem. So there's two main points:

1) What is the proper balance of nuts and raisins to nougat and caramel - are we already at the ideal mix or are is the balance still a bit off?

2) What's the proper course of action to correct that imbalance?

Personally, I think games are a lot more progressive than they used to be. You can find well-written female characters in games now that serve as more than trophies or objects. Even better, you can find well-written women characters that are still sixual human beings without being parodies. And I think we might be on the precipice where games that feature good characterization are no longer novelties or even particularly note-worthy in their inclusion. But that doesn't mean I think the ingredients of my bridge mix are quite ideal yet.

So for talking point 2, I think the best course of action isn't to demonize or denigrate games that have less-than-perfect portrayals or do certain things with camera angles. That's just playing into the offended culture that predominates the internet. It not only focuses on things that can't change (because it already happened - the game already released) but is detrimental to the cause and shifts the goal posts. Besides which that's not even where the problem lies. DOA Beach Volleyball, for example, is absolutely about female six objects. A positive change to the industry isn't going to come from demonizing that game, but to promote games that offer better examples. You don't make a better bridge mix by taking out all the "wrong" pieces of candy - you just add more of what you find lacking. That way you end up with a bigger bag and everyone can find something they like.

It's forest vs trees stuff.

I like how you stated this

Attack and people get defensive before ever hearing one's message. That is all Miss Sarkisian does, attack. And attack. And attack some more.

This. Just ignore her. She does all of this for profit.