Print

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

[Mongrel]

Again, you're operating on the assumption that she doesn't play and enjoy videogames, that she's just some outsider poser type shoving herself into a discussion that doesn't involve her...based on what, exactly?

I figured it was based on the fact that she is actually documenting herself speaking about games in a way that makes it clear she hasn't actually played some or even most of the games she's speaking about.

[Ted Belmont]

Still not sure how that means she's "not a gamer". In fact, if making assumptions based on games we haven't actually played makes one not a gamer, I'd say pretty much every single one of us is guilty of that.

[Brentai]

Based on the fact that she's "studying" gamer culture like some sort of Gorilla in the Mist hero.  Her knowledge of the topic is based on some experience but mostly on Wikipedia, and it's shown again and again and again and again, to the point of where Bal is at - her message doesn't fucking matter any more.  She can't communicate it to her audience in a way that doesn't sound foreign and strange.  The topic is about her now, not damsels in distress, which was, within our little society, already something we were concerning ourselves about before she crash-landed on the scene and made it Anita's Issue.

All I want right now is to find someone who can dispel that level of extra contention, because I'm sure there's probably more than 50% of chucklefucks out there who would still be reacting the same way, and it would be very nice to isolate them from the disgruntled lifers who would have reacted with same dismissal if it had come from Bruce Sarkeesian.

[Joxam]

I think the way you should be looking at this ted is that she presented herself in a way that made people from even this fairly well adjust group of gamers believe that she was an outsider looking in. Perhaps you believe she isn't, perhaps she ACTUALLY isn't, that doesn't matter if the way she presented herself doesn't illustrate that properly. At most she's not a girl gamer, which is debatable, at the very least her writing and video editing skills are called into question for not achieving the desired argument.

All that being said you have to realize why WE don't think this video series does enough to cause any real 'change'. We ARE a fairly well adjust group of gamers, all our faults taken into account. The bar is set considerably higher for most other communities or gamers out there.

[Mongrel]

Anita Sarkeesian as Sir John Mandeville.

[Brentai]

I think the way you should be looking at this ted is that she presented herself in a way that made people from even this fairly well adjust group of gamers believe that she was an outsider looking in.

Okay, yes, that's a lot more fair.  She might BE one of us*, but she presents herself as this detached scholar, and that was the first and last mistake.

* A part of me hopes she really is and is capable of learning from all this, but observation suggests probably not and very probably not.

[Ted Belmont]

We got the commentator we deserve, but not the one we need.

[Brentai]

Fuck, you're right.

[Bal]

We got the commentator we deserve, but not the one we need.

I don't feel like I deserved someone who cannot, for a wide variety of reasons, communicate her point to anyone who wasn't already in agreement.

[Ted Belmont]

...should I have slapped together a crappy gif of Anita riding off on the Batpod, pursued by angry nerds, just to drive home the fact that I was making a joke?

[Bal]

That would have been much more obviously a joke.

[Mongrel]

That also would have been awesome.

[Ted Belmont]

Lack of photoshop/gif making skills: my life, my struggle.

[Classic]

I kind of agree that the topic of conversation has shifted away from whatever her message is. Especially considering...

her message doesn't fucking matter any more... not damsels in distress

her message isn't about damsels in distress, it's been to say, "HEY PEEPS! This shit is pretty weird and insular and problematic!"

All I want right now is to find someone who can dispel that level of extra contention... same dismissal if it had come from Bruce Sarkeesian.

At this time, the person who dispels that level of extra contention is a hypothetical Rule 63 Sarkeesian (who may also moonlight as the BatMan?). When you previously suggested Sarkeesian's "academic" tone (airquotes because I am not sure what tone she accomplishes) was the problem your go-to replacement for Sarkeesian was Aisha Tyler (who does have a hell of a lot more charisma).

I don't know how many people are offended by or dismissing these videos because of the factual errors (most of which I'm willing to chalk up to not wanting to take a diversion to talk about the one or two examples where someone did something that challenged the trope and ruin the flow) of Sarkeesian's videos. But if those people are going to dismiss problems of sexism or what's problematic in these tropes (knowledge of which is basically Don't be an Asshole to Others 204) because of irrelevant factual errors they're doing the work of sexists even if they aren't sexist themselves. They're basically saying remembering the Zelda CDi games is more important than trying to have a more inclusive and equal community.

But yeah...

I'm sure there's probably more than 50% of chucklefucks out there who would still be reacting the same way

I'm not so optimistic, but I'm not sure how to test this now that FemFreq has done this thing.

EDIT:
Added lines and missing words.

[R^2]

Well hell, I'm all for women's equality and I think ass-and-titties as a selling point for media is distasteful and I'm actually embarrassed of how flat and uninteresting I am beyond being a "gamer". Somebody send me tens of thousands of dollars on Kickstarter and we'll see if my video series goes over better.

[AČ]

As long as you do it in the form of an LP.

[Brentai]

Hello boys and girls!  Today we're fighting the patriarchy!

[Mongrel]

I could see that actually being genuinely funny if done right. If you had some female Jonathan Swift-calibre game designer to create it.

[Rico]

... "not a gamer"...

"Not a gamer" is among the more charitable responses to this series. Consider this:
Given the assumption that sexism is pervasive in video games, a feminist gamer ought to be able to readily identify many accurate examples of sexism.
Someone who identifies as a feminist gamer making a series to point out this pervasive sexism in video games has struggled to come up with accurate examples of sexism.
Therefore: Sexism is not pervasive in video games. This is almost certainly false, but it's a decent chain of reasoning.
Therefore: She is not a gamer. Quite possible. Many people seem to agree with this (see the many people who have tried to point out that her craptacular selection of examples does not invalidate her broader point)
et cetera

[AČ]

Yes. The broad point of "Sexism exists in an institutionalized level in video games" is entirely true. No one is debating this.
"Anita Sarlacc is a terrible person to talk about this" is what I and many others believe, because "Anita Subatomic does not do research on her topic." Consider above, where I pointed out that an analysis of her thesis gave the feeling of "She decides what she wants to 'prove', and then writes everything to fit it." And note how such a methodology is being applied in this video series.