Yeah... see I get annoyed at all sides. This is such an annoying subject for me, because the hyperbole and polarization has reached absolutely ludicrous proportions.

Anita Sarkeesian lacks in messaging, so she does share blame. She does these highly academic essays about these tropes, but in order to try and prove her point she draws conversation into a granular level with examples she uses for illustration purposes but drawn out of context, to make a point about an issue with the industry as a whole. (She's trying to say there's too much of one candy in the Bridge Mix, but she does this by comparing and contrasting individual bits of candy.) This apparently gets taken as an attack. Nothing in her videos says these games are evil for their inclusion. In fact, most "normal" feminists would say that while sometimes you have to roll your eyes at some of this, it doesn't mean that you can't still enjoy these games or that those developers need to be put out of a job.

But it's just hyperbole, logical fallacies and invented boogeymen at this point. You ask me, it would do the world good to promote well-made portrayals of women in games. Pretty simple stuff. But I've got one side taking things out of context or grasping at things to get offended with, headed by an academic hosting a video with a flamebait title that's targeted at people who already agree with her and who by and large are going to respond by giving into this culture of offense that makes up so much of the internet now. And on the other hand I've got people who are going to see a woman complaining about videogames and take everything as an attack and who will generally respond in... well, ways that would get you banned from this forum, if we're being honest.

I consider myself to be a feminist but this woman makes me very uncomfortable. I agree with some of her views, in principle, but I also think she does herself and feminism a disservice by presenting these views in a humorless, absolutist, "either/or" manner. Too often I think she seems blind to subtle distinctions. And I think this lack of subtlety brings out a corresponding lack of subtlety in people who disagree with her views. Which does no one any good. Like nu_clear_day, I find myself quickly getting annoyed with both sides.

If anyone is interested I found two videos about Sarkeesian which I think are, on the whole, fairly balanced. They are made by TheGamerFromMars. I agree with most of the points being made in both videos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDT5MHoNKd4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYknjViWu2o

You know, when I don't get riled up over her, which is rare, my problem with her is this:


I can concede she makes fair points at times, but a lot of her points are connected with disgusting misuse, distortion and even blatant lies to make her point. Or as I explained to a friend in a simple explanation of how she makes me feel: She's the kind of person who would declare TES games an affront to Atheists because it has gods and demi-gods in it. Is there sixual use of women in games? Undeniably, but there's also a sixualisation of men as well. Unless you're doing it for kicks most games won't play as a fat slob of a man with moobs to his belly. They usually play average, muscled or fit people. But not everyone sixualises women in games. For example, my 'canon' pawn in Dragon's Dogma is a woman, but I modeled her after a woman trying to be a knight in a man's world, IE: A Brienne of Tarth type of woman. She wears proper plate, surcoat. Her look is also fairly 'plain' as well. But to make my point, I think Sarkeesian has some fairly common thoughts on the things wrong with the video game industry but uses manipulation and deceit to prove this point and any person who is a fairly versed gamer tends to get quite outraged over the fact that she's willing to damn and destroy the reputations of good honest games just to selfishly promote herself. That's my problem with her. It's not her female equality issues I am very heated over, not at all. It's that she lies so much just to back her point instead of actively hunting out real sixism in gaming.

Those were pretty good videos. Thanks for sharing. Still no change on my thoughts on Anita

You're describing idealization. There's a difference between a character being attractive and being sixualized. Lara in the new Tomb Raider games was one, but not the other, for example (as far as I've seen).

I don't see anything wrong with a male or female character being made to look sixually attractive. When I play a Tomb Raider game I want to be a hot looking Lara Croft. When I play Just Cause(good game btw) I want to be a suave good looking guy straight out of GQ magazine.


I think some people are blowing this way out of proportion. An excellent example of first world problems.

No, there's not. Well, save the distinction of use of word. What is idealisation? The ideal female or male we think would be sixually appealing to either ourselves or others as a prime specimen. sixualisation is a very specific term, but idealisation is not a fruit that fell far from the sixualisation tree.

Exactly. One just needs to ask, "Why are they ideal?"

Yeah, if wanted to see real people, i'd leave the house. That's the point of games, making things that aren't possible, possible. Including people that are just... well, perfect

I sure wouldn't mind looking like Rico, but that's just ain't gonna happen

Because a baby McChubbins isn't ideal or healthy. Attraction to a person physically is all about what you find desirable and would like to pass on genetically. That's why fine folks such as myself get the short end of the dating stick, we got the wrong side of the gene pool.

You and me both!

I had a friend of mine write a novel and had agents refuse him because his protagonist wasn't right. It was a woman, they wanted a man. There were no gays. There weren't any blacks. Called a whitefest.


Funny part, he said race and sixual orientation aren't mentioned at all, nor is species. See, its a Sci Fi drama not unlike Star Wars, so she could be a hairy cow and it wouldn't make a difference.


sixual orientation, gender, race that are irrelevant to the story have little place in it. You create the vision that fits your ideal of your character in the narrative.


This is why I support the ability to dress in skimpy clothes for both sixes, body sliders for everything in open RPGs. I'm the center of the story, I'm roleplaying a particular character and he or she will look how I want them to that fits the narrative.


This is no different than wet&cold or real needs and diseases for Skyrim.


And @nu_clear_day, the political snippet came from how far out there modern "feminists" are. Many of them, like the person of question, are misandrists, man haters. Superiority complexes.


It's disgusting and offensive to all their forebears' women's rights fighters.

Yawn, Feminist Nazism, yawn.