Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Disposable Ninja]

Well no, the fighter is pretty boring, I don't know who would play him.

Dragon's Crown, most boring to most awesome: Sorcerer, Fighter, Sorceress, Elf, Amazon, Dwarf

[Büge]

Damsel in Distress: Part 2 - Tropes vs Women in Video Games

Because nobody reads the last post on the previous page.

[Classic]

Damsel in Distress got stretched to 3 parts.

[Brentai]

My favorite kind of damsel in distress!

[Büge]

Niku, get out of Brentai's account.

[Beat Bandit]

I made it almost four minutes in before rolling my eyes. I think that's an improvement on her work.

Now if she can just manage to release a single video without being a damsel at the hands of these terrible internet trolls we'll have some real progress.

[Friday]

On the one hand, I never agree with everything she says and every point she makes in her videos, on the other, the sheer reaction she gets from all the little boys who think it's perfectly fine to stuff a woman in a fridge because IT'S FANTASY DOODZ only proves that the problem she is talking about exists (AT FULL FORCE) and has long, long, long, looooooooong(cat is long) gone fully systemic.

Her errors/specific points I disagree with her on are basically irrelevant. You wanna tear her ass down because she makes demonstrable errors in her analysis? Go for it. But if you're waiting for a chick who perfectly researches everything and never makes any mistakes of any kind while talking about such a hot atomic center of a million suns FALCON. PAAAAAAAUNCH!!! button topic, you're going to be waiting a long time.

Unless you are on the other side of the fence and think sexism is over. In which case she's a paranoid femnazi who clearly slap in the face obviously clearly some argue clearly.

[Ted Belmont]

I made it almost four minutes in before rolling my eyes. I think that's an improvement on her work.

Now if she can just manage to release a single video without being a damsel at the hands of these terrible internet trolls we'll have some real progress.

Er, how is it her fault that a bunch of angry nerds flagged her video?

[Royal☭]

Most people seem to overlook that she says, from the outset, that it's okay to enjoy these things. Hell, in this one, she practically goes out of her way to say that the people who make these games and the people who enjoy them or not bad people, even going so far as to state in no uncertain terms that she does not think these games make monsters, but that it's important and rewarding to take a critical eye to the media we consume. There is no mistake about it, she thinks video games are A-OK, but that doesn't excuse a lot of the regressive plot elements that are put into games without thought on the part of the creators. The fictional Anita who is super angry, wants to ban all the games and thinks men are all rapist exist only in the heads of people who can't get past the initial feminist critique.

While the outright hostility and harassment of Anita is real (and not just her acting like a damsel, as some misogynistic dickbags on these very forums would claim), it's not nearly as problematic as the people who might concede that yes, women's portrayal in games might be lacking, but then do everything they can to try and silence any deeper debate. This usually makes presents itself as people trying to critique external or minute details about the videos, rather than have any meaningful discussion about her main point. Trying to nitpick minor details of interpretation of game plots, long treatise about her interpretation of the roles of characters that she spent less than half a minute addressing in the video, or complaints that because she doesn't allow comments that she is somehow silencing the debate.

Whether you agree with her 100% or not, that does not change the fact that she has seen something in gaming - but not endemic to all of gaming - that is problematic, and is determining to talk about it. You can either take a dismissive, arrogant tone and assume that she is just wrong wrong wrong, or you can understand that she, and women and men like her, really feels strongly about this.

Also, she dared say anything critical about Ico, so I expect gamers to be UP IN ARMS to try and take her down on that 30 seconds of commentary.

[Beat Bandit]

Er, how is it her fault that a bunch of angry nerds flagged her video?

It's not. At all. That's the point.

'People on youtube are shitty and dumb' isn't much of a news story. Most people deal with it instead of disabling rating and comments, or posting to twitter about how their personal harassers are the ones doing it as if it is just them.

It wouldn't be worth mentioning if not for the fact that she's doing a series of videos where she regularly states that all positive character traits are moot once a person is victimized.

[Ted Belmont]

I fail to see how disabling YouTube comments isn't "dealing with it".

Also, are you deliberately missing the point of her videos, or just accidentally?

[Royal☭]

At this point, Beat Bandit's self-professed tolerance of hateful, ignorant comments is a pretty big example of why he should either A) Not be allowed to post in this thread or B) Be outright banned. We don't need such toxicity.

[Ocksi]

I just don't understand why games constantly try to take away my MEN'S RIGHT to having a meaningful relationship and constantly fridges woman

[Smiler]

If being in a fridge was good enough for Indiana Jones, I don't know why they aren't good enough for anyone else.

[Classic]

It wouldn't be worth mentioning if not for the fact that she's doing a series of videos where she regularly states that all positive character traits are moot once a person is victimized.

Sarkeesian refuses the idea that a woman being in distress overrides any positive traits at about 14:45, and at about 12:45, and implicitly in the opening when she suggests that enjoying media does not preclude criticizing its problematic elements (nor does Sarkeesian suggest it should be retired in the video, though she does complain about its ubiquity).

She also reiterates this at timestamp 1:33 in part 2, and again at 3:11, about the time when you claimed you "rolled your eyes".
Well, to be fair, you claimed you rolled your eyes at about 4 minutes, where Sarkeesian tries to explain why Marion's shadowboss impalement doesn't change her objections to the trope.

So...
You're rolling your eyes because you're willfully misunderstanding her position?

[Brentai]

At this point, Beat Bandit's self-professed tolerance of hateful, ignorant comments is a pretty big example of why he should either A) Not be allowed to post in this thread or B) Be outright banned. We don't need such toxicity.

No.

[Mongrel]

So, we're going to do this with every new video.

How many episodes are we getting again?

[Beat Bandit]

She also reiterates this at timestamp 1:33

No... she doesn't. I don't know what to say here, all she does is define a damsel in distress.

in part 2, and again at 3:11, about the time when you claimed you "rolled your eyes".

About the time when she explains how damsels can have other character traits but it just "adds to the disappointment" or can choose to "be sassy", coming in at four minutes when she explains how even if the damsel has a useful trait or provides something at the end it doesn't count because it's just something on the side.

I would consider that a good reason to roll my eyes. Too bad I actually meant closer to the two minute mark when she shows off the cover of Beyond Good & Evil in the middle of talking about one of the rare current games that doesn't follow the trope.

(note: BG&E is a non-stop rule 63 damsel in distress story. First children, then a friendly agent, and finally your uncle for the majority of the story)

So we can agree to one thing at least: she contradicts herself enough that you can argue almost any point from what she says.

[Classic]

She also reiterates this at timestamp 1:33

No... she doesn't. I don't know what to say here, all she does is define a damsel in distress.

As a plot device, and not:

that all positive character traits are moot once a person is victimized.

in part 2, and again at 3:11, about the time when you claimed you "rolled your eyes".

About the time when she explains how damsels can have other character traits but it just "adds to the disappointment" or can choose to "be sassy", coming in at four minutes when she explains how even if the damsel has a useful trait or provides something at the end it doesn't count because it's just something on the side.

Because she's repeatedly explaining to the audience that the trope is still being used even if the character is a "helpful damsel" or a "feisty damsel". She's also saying that she's disappointed when fun, competent characters get "damselled" because as she keeps saying: the Damsel in Distress trope trades one character's competence and agency for the sake of another character's arc.

I would consider that a good reason to roll my eyes. Too bad I actually meant closer to the two minute mark

Then why did you close-to-double the length of time you watched patiently?

when she shows off the cover of Beyond Good & Evil in the middle of talking about one of the rare current games that doesn't follow the trope.

(note: BG&E is a non-stop rule 63 damsel in distress story. First children, then a friendly agent, and finally your uncle for the majority of the story)

You just tried to draw an equivalence between Damsels in Distress and Dudes in Distress. But let's pretend that there weren't mountains more examples of Damsel in Distress than Dudes in Distress and pretend that this wasn't a huge point of the entire video series.
It's still neat because it highlights what makes Distressed Dude (do note that TVTropes uses a broader definition of DiD than Sarkeesian, oh, and that's a TVTropes link) different from Damsels in most cases. Foremost is that none of those characters being rescued are either biologically related to or romantic interests for Jade.

So we can agree to one thing at least: she contradicts herself enough that you can argue almost any point from what she says.

She doesn't contradict herself (in these videos). You're manufacturing these "contradictions" from nothing.

[Classic]

So, we're going to do this with every new video.

How many episodes are we getting again?

I am OK with this because it is important to me that I understand the concerns of people who disagree with me.