Gender Diversity / Politics in games (was Tropes Vs. Women)

[Alex W.]

So what do we label those people?

They don't form weird little Youtube cliques so I'm not sure they need a name. Shit, there are loads of us on Rllmuk.

[NEG]

Misrepresentation isn't a matter of interpretation. Saying "Anita says [such and such] and wants to do [such and such]", when she objectively hasn't, isn't furthering any sort of discussion, it's just spreading lies.

Again, if YOU have a problem with the arguments she makes or the examples she cites, then DISCUSS them. Here. Now. Make a video. Do whatever you want. No-one is stopping you.

So..what happens when someone's spreading my video? Flamed for lies, doesn't further discussion and all the rest?

You make it sound like we should only be responding to Anita, and if we do and someone else links it, it becomes invalid.

This is more confusing than the Sonic Cycle.

[Alex W.]

"In the game of Patriarchy, women aren't participants, they are the ball"

Patriarchy is a phenomenon, not an organisation. It doesn't have agendas, it has effects.

IMO of course, but her writings have tended to emphasise a systems approach to the whole issue.

[Alex W.]

So..what happens when someone's spreading my video? Flamed for lies, doesn't further discussion and all the rest?

You make it sound like we should only be responding to Anita, and if we do and someone else links it, it becomes invalid.

Videos discussing Sarkeesian are fine, but ones that are atrociously misleading are not going to be discussed on their merits.

You did the equivalent of wading into the science thread and saying that we should think deeply about this:

[ZOK]

Hmmm. So what do you make of this quote from the first video:

"In the game of Patriarchy, women aren't participants, they are the ball"

Acknowledging that the patriarchy exists is one thing, saying that she is claiming design choices in games have occurred as part of an 'oppressive patriarchal agenda' is quite another. If you can find her making that specific point anywhere, I'll be curious as to how I've missed it.

How about 'opposing' her position?

[Sprite Machine]

So..what happens when someone's spreading my video? Flamed for lies, doesn't further discussion and all the rest?

Only if it's full of lies and doesn't further the discussion.

[b00dles]

"Hm, I wonder if there is any truth to that. Let's look into this Bell Hooks person. Also, NEG, you are wrong, here's why:"

I'm really struggling here NEG, I'm sure you're a reasonable person but you're coming across more like a point obscuring person in the same manner as GG use, perhaps this is also a learning point for me, in that for whatever reason, some people don't actually know how to take on board the relevant information in a discussion.

There's been about 10 pages of reasons why you're wrong, not to mention the majority of actual information on the subject of feminism or the representation of women in the world and in media.

The fact that you're (and to a degree sir_shrew) somehow thinking this is all still a weird angle of attack on the games industry or even a two sided discussion is beginning to completely fry my brain.

Go and get some books on feminism out of the library, read some entries in the encyclopaedia brittanica or something, DON'T look at youtube videos 'by people you've listened to before' go and read some papers on it that have been researched properly that show their references, or at least have some degree of knowledge on the subject.

I appreciate your position in regards to giving the other side a 'voice' or what have you but seriously there is a time when you just shouldn't give credence to some people's opinions, would you have taken Hitler's views on Jews, to use a totally extreme example?

I've been attempting to try and provide info as you seemed a little confused to begin with and fair enough, if you don't know, not your fault but you've been given umpteen reasons and info on the subject and you're still unable to grasp some basic points that have been raised and I'm going to put a vast amount of money on you STILL not having watched Anita's videos in the first place.

[S0L]

NEG, generally I think you 're a decent guy. Have you watched any of the Tropes videos yet?

If not, then I suggest you start with this one...

What I took from this was that there is a general repetition when it comes to trying to add in adult themes to games. Simply add in a bunch of semi-naked or naked woman, dodgy neon lights and sleazy locations and hey presto! Adult and edgy!

When you look at it through a different lens that's actually pretty cliched, lazy and sexist to boot, and so it challenged and changed my world view. I'd never even thought about it, that's just how things were.

But if we ever want to look at making games more acceptable and inclusive (and dare I say accepted as a valid form of art...) then perhaps we should try and do a lot better as developers and expect a lot better as players.

That's what I took from this video. The others have made me consider plot lines, story, character design and more. I probably wouldn't have though quite so much about it before as we're used to certain 'language' in games in terms of how to set a scene or mood through the kinds of plot, gameplay, visuals and audio. Instead this has made me consider how to challenge the established ways of doing certain elements of a game so they're not quite so lazy, cliched and/or sexist

Also bloody hell at God of War 3, which the sections shown are pretty shocking no matter how you look at it.

Really that's what the videos are about. It's not about suddenly getting everyone to be card carrying feminists, or censorship and saying games can't be made this way, it's merely going 'Have you ever stopped and thought about this' and when you do, you may realise they have a point.

So please, watch that video and have a think about what you see. You might not personally agree with any views expressed and you know what, that's OK. Everyone has a right to an opinion at the end of the day.

But you need to form that opinion yourself. Reading other peoples opinions of what is being said can help you reach that opinion, but you don't know if you like or dislike anything in life for real until you've experienced it yourself. Much like Sonic 06

[Shoes]

If it has someone calling Anita a 'sour-faced feminist' in the first 30 seconds then it isn't worthy of discussion.

[Rowan Morrison]

Whoa, hold on, back it up, beep beep. Are people having a pop at bell hooks now? I'd pay good money to see absolutely any pro-GG mastermind have a one-to-one debate with bell hooks on any subject under the sun. It'd be the intellectual equivalent of putting Melvyn Hayes in the ring with Freddy Krueger.

[NEG]

Videos discussing Sarkeesian are fine, but ones that are atrociously misleading are not going to be discussed on their merits.

How is it misleading though? Because it was talking about Hooks and not Anita specifically?

Only if it's full of lies and doesn't further the discussion.

Can't judge without watching though, right?

I'm really struggling here NEG, I'm sure you're a reasonable person but you're coming across more like a point obscuring person in the same manner as GG use, perhaps this is also a learning point for me, in that for whatever reason, some people don't actually know how to take on board the relevant information in a discussion.

There's been about 10 pages of reasons why you're wrong, not to mention the majority of actual information on the subject of feminism or the representation of women in the world and in media.

The fact that you're (and to a degree sir_shrew) somehow thinking this is all still a weird angle of attack on the games industry or even a two sided discussion is beginning to completely fry my brain.

Go and get some books on feminism out of the library, read some entries in the encyclopaedia brittanica or something, DON'T look at youtube videos 'by people you've listened to before' go and read some papers on it that have been researched properly that show their references, or at least have some degree of knowledge on the subject.

I appreciate your position in regards to giving the other side a 'voice' or what have you but seriously there is a time when you just shouldn't give credence to some people's opinions, would you have taken Hitler's views on Jews, to use a totally extreme example?

I've been attempting to try and provide info as you seemed a little confused to begin with and fair enough, if you don't know, not your fault but you've been given umpteen reasons and info on the subject and you're still unable to grasp some basic points that have been raised and I'm going to put a vast amount of money on you STILL not having watched Anita's videos in the first place.

It's more a case of me pointing out possibly accurate critic out there up for discussion rather then trying to to discredit the subject at all.

We haven't had 10 pages of 'me being wrong'. More so discussion explaining this and that to me, and we certainly haven't had 10 pages on why the video is wrong on Hooks. Though I don't mind, people are free to debate and not debate, not forcing anyone.

As for Hitler, it was on the news recently that Israel's Prime Minister declared Hitler didn't want to kill Jews.

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.681525

My point with that being: Never stop reading, never take anything at face value. The truth is out there. :: cue music ::

I shouldn't be punched so hard verbally each time for finding this stuff.

I probably just won't bother again. I'd actually communicated with Shrew yesterday as to if I should post that Hooks video, knowing full well the kind of reaction this place gets just from thumbnails and not actually viewing any of it without tons of the usual painful posts first.

I continue to appreciate the patience given by those that do.

You guys played S3&K?

[RubberJohnny]

Can't judge without watching though, right?

Of course you can, if someone says the Holocaust is a hoax and offers a three hour Youtube video as proof, I don't need to watch the whole thing (or, for that matter anything) to refute it as a load of shit coming from a racist political position.

Given how you mentioned in the other thread you had absorbed a bunch of unrelated conspiracy theories you appear to be immensely impressionable and easily led.

[matt0]

For context, NEG's first investigations into feminism consisted of watching a video on you tube about how feminists want to turn humanity into a race of asexual amphibians in order to eradicate masculinity. He took this entirely at face value.

Carry on.

[NEG]

Oh man, wonder if there's 3 hour anti-Anita videos..but yes, understand from that perspective. Some things are obvious(ly wrong). This I didn't deem to be, from a discussable viewpoint.

I still say the frog thing was at least interesting to hear

[Darren]

NEG, it seems the only videos you aren't prepared to watch are the actual Tropes videos themselves. The subject of this thread.

You keep uncritically accepting all these second hand opinions but you are apparently unwilling to form your own by watching the actual Tropes videos.

As such I think it's fair to stop assuming that you are posting in good faith.

If you want us to believe you aren't just trolling, then please do what's been suggested time and again. Just watch one of the Tropes videos - that one up there in S0L's post, the one you possed, will do - and then come back and post up YOUR opinion of it. Not somebody else's opinion from some other video. Tell us what YOU think of it.

Is that really too much to ask?

If you won't do that then it begs the question what you hope to achieve by posting, from a position of ignorance which you refuse to address, in a thread about those videos.

[chamberlago]

Whoa, hold on, back it up, beep beep. Are people having a pop at bell hooks now? I'd pay good money to see absolutely any pro-GG mastermind have a one-to-one debate with bell hooks on any subject under the sun. It'd be the intellectual equivalent of putting Melvyn Hayes in the ring with Freddy Krueger.

Damn it. My fat fingers accidentally negged this.

[PK]

NEG, it seems the only videos you aren't prepared to watch are the actual Tropes videos themselves. The subject of this thread.

You keep uncritically accepting all these second hand opinions but you are apparently unwilling to form your own by watching the actual Tropes videos.

As such I think it's fair to stop assuming that you are posting in good faith.

If you want us to believe you aren't just trolling, then please do what's been suggested time and again. Just watch one of the Tropes videos - that one up there in S0L's post, the one you possed, will do - and then come back and post up YOUR opinion of it. Not somebody else's opinion from some other video. Tell us what YOU think of it.

Is that really too much to ask?

If you won't do that then it begs the question what you hope to achieve by posting, from a position of ignorance which you refuse to address, in a thread about those videos.

I feel like I don't have a right to chip in here because I don't post in this thread and just read it because there's always some really interesting debate going on, but please, for fuck's sake NEG, do this. Please.

[Wiper]

In fairness to NEG, information literacy is genuinely a skill that not everyone has (due to not having an aptitude for it, never being taught it, or both), and if you genuinely don't know the best ways to go about researching a topic it can be very difficult to do so. Then if you find yourself disagreeing with something (as I assume NEG does with Anita's videos) in an area you aren't particularly knowledgeable in, it can be hard to explain (or even necessarily understand) exactly why you disagree, and so you seek the opinions of others to explain it for you. And if you've not been involved with this sort of thing (and/or don't spend much time on Twitter/in comments threads) you might not realise that Sargon is a prat. Combine the above issues and you might end up with NEG's misguided post.

NEG, to put the response to the video you'd posted in context, it was pretty much the Tropes vs Women in Video Games equivalent to this recent delight: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/674936832010887168?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

(Note that I'm not trying to suggest that you're an utter cunt like Donald Trump, rather that Sargon is to feminist topics what Katie Hopkins is to, well, everything, and so presenting one of his videos as a respectable source for anything isn't likely to get a hugely positive response)

Honestly, if you want to discuss the videos and their arguments (in depth or lightly), please do as people have suggested already: try and articulate your views and concerns as best you can from your own perspective, rather than linking to random videos. And if you really don't want to do this in a public space but are genuinely interested in discussing the topic, drop me a PM.

[Benny]

Damn it. My fat fingers accidentally negged this.

It's all right - the whole thread's been intentionally Negged anyway.

[NEG]

NEG, it seems the only videos you aren't prepared to watch are the actual Tropes videos themselves. The subject of this thread.

You keep uncritically accepting all these second hand opinions but you are apparently unwilling to form your own by watching the actual Tropes videos.

As such I think it's fair to stop assuming that you are posting in good faith.

If you want us to believe you aren't just trolling, then please do what's been suggested time and again. Just watch one of the Tropes videos - that one up there in S0L's post, the one you possed, will do - and then come back and post up YOUR opinion of it. Not somebody else's opinion from some other video. Tell us what YOU think of it.

Is that really too much to ask?

If you won't do that then it begs the question what you hope to achieve by posting, from a position of ignorance which you refuse to address, in a thread about those videos.

I've watched them, just lazy in re-watching/figured I didn't need to again. I'll watch them all again, take notes, and tell you all about frogs soon enough. (something most won't do for the videos I link, mind you)

I also figured my general stance on the subject (by simply reacting to the most recent stuff like DOA, SFV) gave my general viewpoints well enough already. It's not like I disagree to how women are portrayed in some games out there. It's usually been more a word of caution as to 'what it could possibly lead to' such as censorship, and that's usually coming from me, no one else. It's the comment equivalent of saying don't forget your umbrella, it might rain. No matter how unlikely that outcome.

Stay tuned for more amazing thoughts, next time on Dragon Ball Z.

[SMD]

"Hm, I wonder if there is any truth to that. Let's look into this Bell Hooks person. Also, NEG, you are wrong, here's why:"

It's up to you to educate yourself.

[SMD]

Never mind, I read the rest of the thread. Go fuck yourself, NEG

[NEG]

NEG, to put the response to the video you'd posted in context, it was pretty much the Tropes vs Women in Video Games equivalent to this recent delight: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/674936832010887168?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

(Note that I'm not trying to suggest that you're an utter cunt like Donald Trump, rather that Sargon is to feminist topics what Katie Hopkins is to, well, everything, and so presenting one of his videos as a respectable source for anything isn't likely to get a hugely positive response)

Honestly, if you want to discuss the videos and their arguments (in depth or lightly), please do as people have suggested already: try and articulate your views and concerns as best you can from your own perspective, rather than linking to random videos. And if you really don't want to do this in a public space but are genuinely interested in discussing the topic, drop me a PM.

The difference with both Katie Hopkins and Donald is they're very widely known as the horrible people they are, indeed. Well that and the things they say are more easily identifiably horrible.

I believe the Sargon video had over a thousand likes. (just checked, 4k) He doesn't let on his crazy from just that one video, if he is. Mild insults to the differing viewpoint I'd argue anyone would do for what they feel strongly about (much like in this thread).

But it's also frustrating that anything I've found so far is seen as automatically invalid, so one can't help wonder from that perspective if one is actually wrong or not when it's auto-wrong, no discussion.

Speaking what one thinks, not others, is being heard wide and clear. I could raise the argument of different personalities on the subject making things interesting, but it's clearly not what the thread wants. Fem actions. GG actions. Game industry actions. And our thoughts on all three (of those news items), not others. Fair enough.

[PK]

It's not like I disagree to how women are portrayed in some games out there. It's usually been more a word of caution as to 'what it could possibly lead to' such as censorship,

Why do you feel that acknowledging & discussing how women are portrayed in some (arguably the majority of) games would necessarily lead to censorship?

I ask because this seems to be a common attitude amongst the GG crowd but it seems like a bit of a reactionary leap.

[Wroth]

The difference with both Katie Hopkins and Donald is they're very widely known as the horrible people they are, indeed. Well that and the things they say are more easily identifiably horrible.

That's exactly why Wiper used them as an example, to more clearly illustrate the point to you.

But it's also frustrating that anything I've found so far is seen as automatically invalid, so one can't help wonder from that perspective if one is actually wrong or not when it's auto-wrong, no discussion.

What other videos are you referring to? that satirical clip of the news reader? or the pokemon heart gold cover perhaps?

[RubberJohnny]

I believe the Sargon video had over a thousand likes. (just checked, 4k) He doesn't let on his crazy from just that one video, if he is. Mild insults to the differing viewpoint I'd argue anyone would do for what they feel strongly about (much like in this thread).

It's because everyone you've found has been a serial harasser of women and regularly use their audience to target harassment, their extremism is well beyond someone like Katie Hopkins (who basically just plays Devils Advocate for money and never takes stuff into real life). This has been pointed out to you multiple times.

That you or sir_shrew can't seem to find someone who argues from the other "side" who isn't a screaming bigot says quite a lot, no?

[Bobby Digihill]

If the cause of equality can be furthered through civil discourse and reasoned debate, why do those who seek to maintain the status quo need doxxing, swatting and other mob justice techniques to counter?

The patriarchy is so embedded in our society, many people re-enforce it without even being aware they are doing so. In mostly small actions, sometimes seemingly insignificant on their own and without any overt desire to cause harm, patriarchy entrenches itself, without any sinister oversight. It requires no conspiracy or force to maintain, which is, perhaps, why it's difficult to fight, as well as being seen, by some, as the way things are or should be.

If the deck is stacked in favour of certain people, within this system, then why is it that the baying mob are the ones defending the status quo, rather than the people who say there's enough equality to go around?

[NEG]

Why do you feel that acknowledging & discussing how women are portrayed in some (arguably the majority of) games would necessarily lead to censorship?

I ask because this seems to be a common attitude amongst the GG crowd but it seems like a bit of a reactionary leap.

I rather not repeat myself at length but something as small as what Capcom tried to do for example is not the right way of going about things. Also it's not like Japanese games didn't get censored in the past to begin with, but there could be an increase of it as developers/publishers don't want a fuss.

That's exactly why Wiper used them as an example, to more clearly illustrate the point to you.

What other videos are you referring to? that satirical clip of the news reader? or the pokemon heart gold cover perhaps?

1) Agreed, hence the 'Indeed'.

2) From memory I'd linked ReviewTechUSA a week or so ago that caused a fuss, whom I generally like as he sometimes rants about SEGA alongside day to day game news. Probably forgetting another.

It's because everyone you've found has been a serial harasser of women, their extremism is well beyond someone like Katie Hopkins (who is basically just a troll and never takes stuff into real life). This has been pointed out to you multiple times.

That you or sir_shrew can't seem to find someone who argues from the other "side" who isn't a screaming bigot says quite a lot, no?

It certainly could be. (saying a lot) But I mean, even outside this topic it's not like the forum particularly enjoys the viewpoints I find on every day gaming subjects and reviews usually either. Like, you know, Ranting Robots. More ordinary subjects can be argued as more a matter of taste though, certainly. Which is partly the reason I carried on (this subject) for a little while without thinking it different. I realize it's different now.

No more responding until I watch stuff, stop asking! I love you all too! xxx

Edit: Any excuse

[Unofficial Who]

This seems a good point to bring in this piece Bobby.

"He who fights with monsters should be careful lest he thereby become a monster.
And if thou gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will also gaze into thee."

I've just read this horrific story here. http://www.metafilter.com/155464/The-most-horrifying-place-to-find-yourself-trapped-is-an-echo-chamber

Steven Universe (Previously) is an animated series created by Rebecca Sugar which airs on Cartoon Network. It is known for excellent world building, progressive sensibilities, a heartwarming, genuine sense of humor, and a cast of characters which is deep, complex and diverse. It has received significant critical acclaim and has cultivated a large and diverse collection of fans. The show's fandom has recently experienced controversy when some individuals engaged in a campaign of harassment and bullying that drove a young Steven Universe fan artist named Paige Paz (aka Zamii070) to attempt suicide.

Paige Paz's art was widely criticized for content that was described as fatphobic, transphobic, racist, abelist, and more. Over time, a portion of that deluge of commentary crossed the boundary from criticism to the bullying and harassment which Paz says led to her suicide attempt.

When the news of the incident began to spread within the fandom, it set off a fiery debate about how to balance the need to call out potentially offensive imagery in online spaces with the tendency of individuals to sometimes fall prey to mob like thinking and take things too far. To some observers, it didn't seem like that balance was easy to find. "Either you’re a villain cause you condone offensive drawings or you’re a villain cause you agree with harassment of young artists. There’s no winning."

Co-producer Ian Jones-Quartey, after deleting a less thought out message, may have said it best. "Fanartists can create whatever art they want & everyone has the freedom to criticize it for any reason. However, bullying is not criticism."

Letting Yourself Harass Zamii For Love of Steven Universe: Life Lessons From Going Too Far

An Attempted Suicide Forced a Tumblr Community to Open Its Eyes About Bullying

If you or a loved one are experiencing harassment online, there are resources available to help. Feminist Frequency has recently released an excellent guide to protecting yourself from online threats and harassment. (via) The National Suicide Prevention Lifeline is available for anyone experiencing suicidal thoughts.

And I do think one has to be careful with balance, to criticise and not bully. Which leads to the opportunity of the thread being ripped apart by concern trolls (and I'll have more to say about that tactic later once I've thought about it more.) As much as I disagree with Sir Shrew on some points, and as much as I suspect Neg is concern trolling, I still think their voices are important. I'm glad to see we haven't become as brutal as tumblr about this topic.

[DukeOfEarlsfield]

The GimbleGompers have a new hashtag in their war on femini^H^H^Hcensorshi^H^H^H^Hreality.

#1MillionGamersStrong is a new campaign against, as they see it, censorship in videogames. Actually it's a campaign for bigger tits (and more of them|) in games.

Some sample tweets:

https://novogamer.com/185/censorship-in-games---concerned-gamers-start-1milliongamersstrong

At the time of writing this, the petition has only around 2,300 signatures and the hashtag is at 7,200 Tweets although it has only been a day since it started. Whether the petition and hashtag gains any traction remains to be seen. The subject of censorship and self-censorship however is back as a significant talking point.

Wow, over two thousand already! Only another 997,700 gamers to go guys.

(And yes, I'm aware that article hasn't a clue what 'Third Wave Feminism' actually is.