Ms. Male Character - Tropes vs Women in Video Games

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Edited by Trail_Mix (2021 posts) -

Haven't seen this posted here on the forums yet.

Probably her best video in the series yet, and that's saying something. I'm also surprised she didn't have the ratings disable this time around.

I don't quite understand the issue with the addition of cliched, feminine characteristics to differentiate between genders though. Especially with these "ms. male characters" that are used as an alternative choice for the already one-dimensional male protagonists.

Overall I think a majority of the issues she brings up in this video have a lot to do with developer laziness. Conveniently that seems to be a recurring answer with all these videos in the series.

Thoughts?

#2 Edited by Jacanuk (3862 posts) -

Thoughts? are you serious expecting anyone to sit through 25min of some "feminist" rant about women in gaming?

But her points are the same old rant as they always come with "men are too much in focus and women are equal to men in every way" which they haven't figured out yet isn't true.

So my thoughts are wrong place, wrong time and bad advertisement for that channel.

#3 Edited by Trail_Mix (2021 posts) -
@Jacanuk said:

Thoughts? are you serious expecting anyone to sit through 25min of some "feminist" rant about women in gaming?

But her points are the same old rant as they always come with "men are too much in focus and women are be as though and evil as men" which they havent figured out yet isent true.

So my thoughts are wrong place, wrong time and bad advertisment for that channel.

Sure? What are you, strapped for time?

Seriously, you don't need to bite my head off though. I'm just curious to see what people think about the topic she's discussing. It's not like this hasn't been done before on the forums with one of her previous videos.

#4 Posted by Jacanuk (3862 posts) -

@Jacanuk said:

Thoughts? are you serious expecting anyone to sit through 25min of some "feminist" rant about women in gaming?

But her points are the same old rant as they always come with "men are too much in focus and women are be as though and evil as men" which they havent figured out yet isent true.

So my thoughts are wrong place, wrong time and bad advertisment for that channel.

Sure? What are you, strapped for time?

Seriously, you don't need to bite my head off though. I'm just curious to see what people think about the topic she's discussing. It's not like this hasn't been done before on the forums with one of her previous videos.

It wasn´t to bite your head off.

It was more a reaction to the same rant we have had here a ton of times and honestly for me its getting tiresome because its the same thing over and over again, like with this youtuber´s rant, her name is even feminist so she doesnt hide her agenda and when they get like this i loose all hope in them saying anything relevant or intelligent.

#5 Edited by platinumking320 (663 posts) -

@Jacanuk: I know right? Here too? It's like...Goodness. We know. We know already. Maan. Its better off if The Escapist make endless threads upon threads about this. Even when Movie Bob and Jim aren't making their comments on the issue. They have more things to cover.

Besides looking at a gender issue is only one part of looking at what makes a game narrative work or not. There are a whole host of other things in games one could additionally skew to push for improvement.

If anyone has to shoulder blame just throw it on Halo as the thematic industry 'gift and the curse' and call it a day.

IMO It was only after Halo and the following first X-BOX release titles where MS aggressively tried to define and round out our Brah' western interests to their titles. If it were just Sony, (and this isn't out of hate for any console, just a critique of marketing tactics.) a lot of titles might've been a little more diverse by now.

#6 Posted by Trail_Mix (2021 posts) -
@Jacanuk said:

@Trail_Mix said:
@Jacanuk said:

Thoughts? are you serious expecting anyone to sit through 25min of some "feminist" rant about women in gaming?

But her points are the same old rant as they always come with "men are too much in focus and women are be as though and evil as men" which they havent figured out yet isent true.

So my thoughts are wrong place, wrong time and bad advertisment for that channel.

Sure? What are you, strapped for time?

Seriously, you don't need to bite my head off though. I'm just curious to see what people think about the topic she's discussing. It's not like this hasn't been done before on the forums with one of her previous videos.

It wasn´t to bite your head off.

It was more a reaction to the same rant we have had here a ton of times and honestly for me its getting tiresome because its the same thing over and over again, like with this youtuber´s rant, her name is even feminist so she doesnt hide her agenda and when they get like this i loose all hope in them saying anything relevant or intelligent.

That's fine. Like I said, I personally find her stance on gaming interesting, and worthy of a discussion, hence why I made this thread, but if no one else does- that's fine too.

And you don't have to be civilized about it either. If you wanna criticize and/or critique her or the topic, more power to ya.

#7 Posted by IndianaPwns39 (5037 posts) -

That's fine. Like I said, I personally find her stance on gaming interesting, and worthy of a discussion, hence why I made this thread, but if no one else does- that's fine too.

And you don't have to be civilized about it either. If you wanna criticize and/or critique her or the topic, more power to ya.

The problem being this: while you find her stance interesting and worthy of discussion, she herself does not. She creates the videos and moves on, never to actually discuss or defend her points of view.

I wholeheartedly understand her reasoning for disabling the comments on Youtube. If they were on we'd see a bunch of juvenile hogwash thrown her way. However, she doesn't respond to genuine criticism and never addresses these concerns in later videos. She simply dismisses them and presents her videos as absolute fact instead of a particular point of view.

For example, in one video she makes it very clear that story context doesn't matter. She simply lists games that have the trope, but dismisses a game if it handles the story well or in a mature manner. It looks like she's doing that here too. I'm not likely to take a complaint that puts Ms. Pac Man and the female Shepard in the same category seriously.

There's definitely room for improvement when it comes to females in games, yes, and the topic is worthy of discussion. Sarkeesian isn't the woman to push the movement though, since she never backs up her claims or looks at the broader spectrum.

She's also quick to attack and slow to acknowledge progress. For example, don't criticize Resident Evil 4 for Ashley and then never acknowledge Ada.

#9 Edited by Lulu_Lulu (9722 posts) -

Is this Anita Sarkeesian again ?

I think she's still in victim, you can still see the residual after effects of abuse gamers have inflicted on her, Its a shame really, shes right but nobodys going to listen to her if she keeps being so vengefull, its killing her cause. Sorry comrades but I'm on her side, because boobs ! :D

#10 Edited by platinumking320 (663 posts) -

@WR_Platinum said:

My response this annoying feminist.

Simple logic, something that chick doesn't have.

Reminds me of comedian Bill Burr "You people are all the same" stand up show. Where at the end he touches on 'Ahnold's' and Tiger Woods infidelities, and criticizes an article on what causes rich guys to screw up written by a woman,

Oh well just watch from 1:02:21 onward. soo funny. Or Hell, even 55 min in for full context.

#11 Posted by CarnageHeart (18316 posts) -

The put a bow on it trope is pretty funny. That warthog has pink bow on. Clearly its female!

I'm fine with Sarkessian's videos. Most players seem to pour on the hate, but the response of designers has been largely positive and I expect some of them will think twice before leaning on some of the tropes (Ms. Male, Smurfette) Sarkessian has identified in her video.

#12 Posted by loafofgame (422 posts) -

I'm not sure what to think. I understand that she feels the need to point out and criticise how women are portrayed in videogames, but in this case I don't think it adds anything. This will only convince people who were already convinced in the first place. And she offers no solution. It's 25 minutes of negative feedback, which isn't very constructive or considerate. And I understand it's hard to be considerate if you consider yourself to be negatively stereotyped, but this critique won't change anything.

This is a very complex issue, something you can't expect to change overnight. Women have been (and in some cases still are) generally subordinate to men. This is an attitude ingrained in both men and women (and not just men, but also women hold on to aspects of this attitude and take them for granted). Ideals, values and cultures have been constructed according to this attitude. And of course it makes sense to question this attitude, but I really think it'd be more constructive to approach it from both sides. The video posted by @WR_Platinum is a perfect example. The guy generalises all males into a group that I, as a male, don't really want to be part of. I honestly don't need female characters with disproportionally large breasts and/or stereotypical feminine traits. It adds nothing to my gameplay enjoyment. But the guy in the video implies that I, as a male, (should) like these things. He's stuck in his own limited vision of what a man prefers. It's too easy to deny any responsibility and claim women should solve the problem themselves, just like it's too easy to simply point out obvious problems and not offer any solutions.

People are extremely self-entitled. They expect change that benefits them and they expect it right now. I'm afraid that Sarkeesian isn't going to see the change she desires in her lifetime. You can make some big differences by changing laws (women being allowed to vote and stuff like that), but an attitude change takes time and requires the willingness from both sides to adapt and make concessions. I think the main problem is that both sides forget to look at how they themselves construct their interpretations and convictions and how they (subconsciously perhaps) attribute to sustaining some questionable inequalities or stereotypes. For example, a lot of men and women claim to be tolerant when it comes to the opposite gender, but how tolerant are they of their own?

And of course, one should always keep in mind that men and women are in fact different in ways that are not "artificial and socially constructed", and while this doesn't justify the strict binary thinking, it does create a form of opposing sides that can't be ignored and that will always remain, no matter how much you rationalise it. Besides, most people (both men and women) desire clear boundaries and unambiguous convictions. It makes life more managable, more secure and less confusing (and therefore less tiring), and that alone makes it very hard to convince people to change their attitude.

#13 Posted by El_Zo1212o (6005 posts) -

@Trail_Mix: This woman is a complete moron. I don't know why I even watch this crap anymore.

She goes on and on about this nonsense while conveniently ignoring the fact that 1. all of the advertisements and snippets she's using for the first 20 minutes are between 20 and 30 years old(and then calls them 'regressive.') What a joke.

and 2. that all of these characters are equal in every way except their design. Isn't equality the final goal of all these god damned feminists?

#14 Posted by The_Last_Ride (69630 posts) -

I still think that playing through Mass Effect or any game you can choose the gender of the character isn't wrong at all. Sure it's nice to have a female lead, but it should also be possible to choose gender. I think that woman is so overrated and gets way more attention than she deserves. She has even said so herself that she doesn't play videogames and most of her research is subjective and not based on facts

#15 Edited by kbaily (13042 posts) -

As a girl who plays games, I'd love to have a calm, mature discussion over the Tropes vs. Women vids but the minute you mention the name Ana Sarkesian, every red blooded male has a fit because there's this idea that all "feminists" are lesibian, ball busters who hate all men or worse, this mindset that "women are equal now so there's no need for feminism discussions about anything." Do I agree with everything Ana says? No. But she has made some points. I was tired of Peach always getting kidnapped in the majority of Mario games and it's great that with 3D World, Peach gets to fight alongside Mario and the gang. Why wasn't she playable back with NSMBWii or U? Also I don't like that both Smash Bros. and PS All Stars had a lot few female fighters to choose from. Complain about the Wii Fit Trainer all you want, it's nice to have another female in Smash that isn't a princess. Can you name a 1st party Nintendo female to join Smash not from Mario or Pokémon? I also liked that she pointed out how Krystal was intended to be the main character of Dinosaur Planet but got replaced with Fox for BRAND NAME RECOGNITION and she was reduced to being rescued. That could've been a new IP, then again being from Rare it would've been bought by MS and Krystal would've been locked away in MS's basement with Conker and the Jet Force Gemini crew, never to be heard from again.

Now I'd really just love to see Ana take on Metroid: Other M because, for me that was worse for women in games than any slutty costume. Samus being possibly the only non oversexualized female in gaming, turning into a whiny bimbo with daddy issues, making a point to show off her butt in the zero suit (where she stayed in her suit the majority of other games) and having her freak out over the bad guy she defeated something like 5 times before that game and needing her space marine buddies to come in and help. Plus having her rip on Other M, would probably give Moviebob a brain hemmorage because he wouldn't be able to agree with Ana and defend Other M at the same time.

The thing that really gets me is the number of guys who act all awful about this and make derogatory statements towards women then turn around and wonder why girls don't want to go out with them.

On great example of a series that has tried to rise above the Ms. Male character trope is the Sonic series. Amy started out as the only female, a pink recolor of Sonic and a damsel but then around Sonic Adventure, they changed up her design, gave her her own little story where she saves herself (though not that great to play) and while she is still annoying and stalks Sonic, at least she's got more going for her than Peach. Then Rouge the Bat was brought into SA2 but any potential she had of being an interesting character was thrown out thanks to Sega giving her huge bat boobies. Cream was brought in but she's just a typical little girl. She's whiny and helpless most of the time but the best female of the Sonic series by far was Blaze the Cat. Though in Rush, she was basically Sonic but slightly slower and more acrobatic, she actually acted like a person. She didn't get captured. She wasn't hopelessly in love with anyone (despite Silver having a crush on her I guess). She was tough and strong and wasn't dressed like a slut though I question the idea of have her run in heels.

#16 Posted by loafofgame (422 posts) -

@kbaily said:

As a girl who plays games, I'd love to have a calm, mature discussion over the Tropes vs. Women vids but the minute you mention the name Ana Sarkesian, every red blooded male has a fit because there's this idea that all "feminists" are lesibian, ball busters who hate all men or worse, this mindset that "women are equal now so there's no need for feminism discussions about anything."

You optimist, implying that it's only Sarkeesian that makes people go mental... ;-) Just use the word 'female' and 'videogames' in one sentence and you can expect a shitstorm.

#17 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18177 posts) -

It's debunking time:

#18 Edited by Jacanuk (3862 posts) -

@kbaily said:

As a girl who plays games, I'd love to have a calm, mature discussion over the Tropes vs. Women vids but the minute you mention the name Ana Sarkesian, every red blooded male has a fit because there's this idea that all "feminists" are lesibian, ball busters who hate all men or worse, this mindset that "women are equal now so there's no need for feminism discussions about anything." Do I agree with everything Ana says? No. But she has made some points. I was tired of Peach always getting kidnapped in the majority of Mario games and it's great that with 3D World, Peach gets to fight alongside Mario and the gang. Why wasn't she playable back with NSMBWii or U? Also I don't like that both Smash Bros. and PS All Stars had a lot few female fighters to choose from. Complain about the Wii Fit Trainer all you want, it's nice to have another female in Smash that isn't a princess. Can you name a 1st party Nintendo female to join Smash not from Mario or Pokémon? I also liked that she pointed out how Krystal was intended to be the main character of Dinosaur Planet but got replaced with Fox for BRAND NAME RECOGNITION and she was reduced to being rescued. That could've been a new IP, then again being from Rare it would've been bought by MS and Krystal would've been locked away in MS's basement with Conker and the Jet Force Gemini crew, never to be heard from again.

Now I'd really just love to see Ana take on Metroid: Other M because, for me that was worse for women in games than any slutty costume. Samus being possibly the only non oversexualized female in gaming, turning into a whiny bimbo with daddy issues, making a point to show off her butt in the zero suit (where she stayed in her suit the majority of other games) and having her freak out over the bad guy she defeated something like 5 times before that game and needing her space marine buddies to come in and help. Plus having her rip on Other M, would probably give Moviebob a brain hemmorage because he wouldn't be able to agree with Ana and defend Other M at the same time.

The thing that really gets me is the number of guys who act all awful about this and make derogatory statements towards women then turn around and wonder why girls don't want to go out with them.

You know what i will never get with women and particular women like Sarkessian, is why do they expect the gaming industry to change because of a minority and if someone really believe that its not a minority, why are they all still talking and not doing? you know the old saying does that can't rant... is this really the case here? because if there is a huge demand or untapped market for these kinds of games why don't these feminist start their own game development teams and show the rest how it can be done?

Money talks and if it really is the case of everyone wanting this, then you have a goldmine and a way to change the industry.

#19 Posted by alim298 (1108 posts) -

Ehh... What are we talking about here???

#20 Posted by loafofgame (422 posts) -

It's debunking time

It's videos like this that make me wish for some numbers on this whole issue. I know numbers don't tell the whole story, but some statistic overview of how people actually think about this issue would be nice. How much do men/women gamers care about female/male portrayels in videogames (and why)? How much do men/women gamers care about non-stereotypical female/male protagonists/characters (and why)? Make sure all the variables are in there (age, country, game genre, etc.) and also establish how big all the different groups are. Then maybe we can put this whole discussion into an actual context, instead of two sides just speculating based on their own experiences.

Maybe then we could settle the dispute about women experiencing female characters in videogames as misogynistic or men experiencing male characters in videogames as misandric. About how important and necessary it is to change all these portrayels (both male and female). About how much both sides really care about actual changes in that department and more importantly why they do or don't care. I'm not saying we should then use those stats to conclude whether or not the issue needs to be debated, but it could at least offer some common ground to start from. So far (not specifically in this thread) I only see both sides attacking each other's extremes, which is highly unproductive.

It's inconsiderate to attack a deeply ingrained attitude most people aren't even aware of (and that is sustained not just by men but also by women) and implicitly demand an instant attitude change and an overhaul of the gaming industry, without taking into account any reasonable arguments that might contradict your claims. It's also inconsiderate to refuse any form of responsibility and moral consciousness and just point your finger at market processes, without any willingness to adapt to or support a minority or even respect how this minority feels.

I think both Sarkeesian and those two guys in the other movies are flawed in their approach. I think they all have points, but they all ruin it for the sake of being catchy, controversial and/or confronting.

#21 Posted by CoquiNegro (173 posts) -

@Jacanuk: Wait, are you saying female gamers are the minority. As in a huge minority?

#22 Posted by Jacanuk (3862 posts) -

@Jacanuk: Wait, are you saying female gamers are the minority. As in a huge minority?

Well, i wasn't actually making a statement about women who play games. It was more a who has a problem with the way games are currently and are demanding the industry to focus more the female gender.

But anyways its a good guess that most gamers are male and between the ages 6-28.

#23 Posted by Randolph (10423 posts) -

@kbaily said:

I was tired of Peach always getting kidnapped in the majority of Mario games and it's great that with 3D World, Peach gets to fight alongside Mario and the gang. Why wasn't she playable back with NSMBWii or U?

Because Miyamoto and his team didn't feel like creating a new character model. They explained it was super easy to just take the Mario model and make two different color Toad characters, so they just did that. No, really. That's why. Pure laziness. I have no comment on the video, I won't even watch the video. The person in the video is a tired caricature at this point who does more harm than good to her own cause. She is to feminism what Ray Comfort is to Christianity.

#24 Posted by CoquiNegro (173 posts) -

@Jacanuk: Oh my bad, but MOST aren't necessarily true. 47% of all gamers are indeed female. ESRB report. That's a pretty large number, and I don't care to deny it. Most gamers that I know are females, though obviously their preferences aren't the same as males.

#25 Posted by Jacanuk (3862 posts) -

@Jacanuk: Oh my bad, but MOST aren't necessarily true. 47% of all gamers are indeed female. ESRB report. That's a pretty large number, and I don't care to deny it. Most gamers that I know are females, though obviously their preferences aren't the same as males.

Think we had a debate around that number and if i remember correct the number was just something they drew out of thin air.

But if 47% is really female it´s kinda strange that none of these more vocal feminists don't spend their time making games to cater to these women instead of complaining and feeling angry over their perception of the unfair treatment women get.

Because everyone knows that everything a man can do a woman can do and even do better most times. ;)

#26 Posted by WR_Platinum (4666 posts) -

@WR_Platinum said:

My response this annoying feminist.

Simple logic, something that chick doesn't have.

Reminds me of comedian Bill Burr "You people are all the same" stand up show. Where at the end he touches on 'Ahnold's' and Tiger Woods infidelities, and criticizes an article on what causes rich guys to screw up written by a woman,

Oh well just watch from 1:02:21 onward. soo funny. Or Hell, even 55 min in for full context.

lol that was funny. XD

So did mods delete my post? How am I even offending anyone?

#27 Edited by -TheSecondSign- (9179 posts) -

I don't understand.

A lot of the games she references were older games that were pretty shitty when it came to graphics. They probably threw a bow or something in there because that was the only way to distinguish them. Also, most of the characters are have no less personality than their male counterparts.

Nobody played Bomberman for the three dimensional characters and deep story. And if the original character is a sentient explosion with no other traits is it really a big deal for the female version to be the same thing but with a bow on it?

These aren't real characters, they're mascots and 8 bit sprites.

#28 Posted by Pedro (21006 posts) -

I personally don't like this fool. She is painfully pretentious. I also would like know when would here complaining about videogames end? Has she ever offered a solution to anything? Does she even care or about women portrayal in games? She seems to loathe in the ecstasy of complaining with the hope of no change. People like her are more damaging to the "cause" than beneficial.

#29 Edited by Black_Knight_00 (18177 posts) -

@loafofgame said:

It's videos like this that make me wish for some numbers on this whole issue. I know numbers don't tell the whole story, but some statistic overview of how people actually think about this issue would be nice. How much do men/women gamers care about female/male portrayels in videogames (and why)? How much do men/women gamers care about non-stereotypical female/male protagonists/characters (and why)? Make sure all the variables are in there (age, country, game genre, etc.) and also establish how big all the different groups are. Then maybe we can put this whole discussion into an actual context, instead of two sides just speculating based on their own experiences.

I think a lot of people are falling in a trap. Something here must be made perfectly clear before we give this any more thought: Sarkeesian doesn't give a rat's ass about videogames and the portrayal of women in videogames. That's just her jingling keys in front of the viewer's eyes. The real agenda behind what she's doing is simple and can be summed up in 2 points:

1) Get views and make money. This is the smaller picture, her personal gain. She's raising an issue on a popular medium (games) so that she can acquire visibility and have the mob of tumblr feminists who buy into this patriarchy crap subscribe to her channel and donate to her kickstarter. It worked: the kickstarter net her over $158.000 months ago and she has still done nothing with it, to my knowledge.

2) The bigger picture: contribute to the modern feminism political agenda bent on replacing the nonexisting "patriarchy" with a matriarchy and trying to convince women that they *don't* have equal rights, that men are oppressing them and that every men is a closet rapist, so they can acquire special rights. This is one of the most loathsome movements in human history, predicated on the idea that "MEN ARE EVIL" and a stain on the record of historical feminism, which had every right to fight when women were really being wronged, and that's 60-70 years ago.

Today women are considered equal to men in western society. Are there sparse examples of inequality? Sure there are, but this is also true against men. There are cases when women are discriminated against and there are cases when men are discriminated against. These modern feminists are doing nothing but creating gender tension which has no reason to be there, is harmful to society and is ruining the perception young women have of the opposite gender.

#30 Edited by loafofgame (422 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00: I'm not entirely sure I agree with you on the nonexisting patriarchy. For as far as I know women are equal by law (at least in my country), but I think that some traditional patriarchal ideas and attitudes are still being sustained by both men and women (not just to the detriment but also to the sincere contentment of both men and women). That's where the line of equality becomes blurry and where people start to fill in for themselves what is considered masculine or feminine. Absolute equality is also unattainable, since men and women are on some points inherently different, whether some people like that or not. I think that within that blurry field of (unconsciously sustained) attitudes and biological traits there's room for women and men to criticise the 'status quo'.

But I think it's a misconception to think that with equality by law there's also no general patriarchal attitude anymore. Attitude changes take much and much longer. It's naive to think that the way we thought 60-70 years ago has completely vanished, because some law says women can vote and should be treated equally when applying for a job (and there are many ways to work around a law). Of course there's also discrimination against men and that deserves attention too, but I think men have it a little bit easier in general, simply because society was (and in some cases still is) male dominated. Which is probably why it seems that women are complaining more. But maybe that's also because men are afraid to complain, because they don't want to be seen as pussies (again because of traditional attitudes). But again, this takes place within that blurry field where it's unclear where equality ends and inequality begins. And I think that within that field you and I have different opinions. ;-)

But I agree it's very unproductive to address these issues by just focusing on one side and solely highlighting the negative aspects. I completely disagree with Sarkeesian's approach and tactics.

@Jacanuk: Oh my bad, but MOST aren't necessarily true. 47% of all gamers are indeed female. ESRB report. That's a pretty large number, and I don't care to deny it. Most gamers that I know are females, though obviously their preferences aren't the same as males.

One of the main issues with that report is the preference part and I think it would help if the report had also shown genre distinctions and maybe the amount of time spent playing these different genres. I believe the report also includes casual games, which for a lot of male gamers was a reason to claim that the high percentage was due to women playing a lot of facebook games, but not being part of the 'hardcore' crowd. That again lead to the conclusion that women shouldn't criticise 'hardcore' games for their stereotypical female portrayels or lack of female protagonists, because women simply aren't the target group in these games.

#31 Edited by Black_Knight_00 (18177 posts) -

@loafofgame said:

@Black_Knight_00: I'm not entirely sure I agree with you on the nonexisting patriarchy. For as far as I know women are equal by law (at least in my country), but I think that some traditional patriarchal ideas and attitudes are still being sustained by both men and women (not just to the detriment but also to the sincere contentment of both men and women). That's where the line of equality becomes blurry and where people start to fill in for themselves what is considered masculine or feminine. Absolute equality is also unattainable, since men and women are on some points inherently different, whether some people like that or not. I think that within that blurry field of (unconsciously sustained) attitudes and biological traits there's room for women and men to criticise the 'status quo'.

But I think it's a misconception to think that with equality by law there's also no general patriarchal attitude anymore. Attitude changes take much and much longer. It's naive to think that the way we thought 60-70 years ago has completely vanished, because some law says women can vote and should be treated equally when applying for a job (and there are many ways to work around a law). Of course there's also discrimination against men and that deserves attention too, but I think men have it a little bit easier in general, simply because society was (and in some cases still is) male dominated. Which is probably why it seems that women are complaining more. But maybe that's also because men are afraid to complain, because they don't want to be seen as pussies (again because of traditional attitudes). But again, this takes place within that blurry field where it's unclear where equality ends and inequality begins. And I think that within that field you and I have different opinions. ;-)

But I agree it's very unproductive to address these issues by just focusing on one side and solely highlighting the negative aspects. I completely disagree with Sarkeesian's approach and tactics.

Say you've just finished cleaning your sink, you look at it and think "yes, that is a clean sink" even though you know it's not 100% clean, since there are microbes you can't remove with just water and cleaning products, but you can still say it's clean, its a sanitary and functional sink.

I believe western society is at this point: even though a few scarcely significant pockets of discrimination may remain, feminism has fought its battle in the first half (and in smaller measure in the second half) of the past century and I'll be the first to acknowledge it has righted a huge wrong that was being perpetrated towards women. Now it has served its purpose. Equal opportunity is a value that is solidly embedded in our society and feminism no longer has any reason to exist. Like the scaffolding only gets in the way and needs to be removed once the restructuring of a building is completed, feminism is completely obsolete in the civilized world.

Still we have these activists who enjoyed the fight so much that now that it's won (and not by them, but rather their grandmothers) they don't know what to do with their lives and now seek to take the extra step and create a society where women take the upper hand and get to oppress men in revenge, which is an attitude that will completely destroy all of the positive that has been achieved to this day.

There are countries where women are still mistreated and that's where feminists should go if they want to do any good, but western society has no need for them.

#32 Posted by loafofgame (422 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00: Well, to keep it short (because I'll repeat myself otherwise): I agree equal opportunity is there, but I still think some questionable (and significant) attitudes remain that justify feminism. And you shouldn't associate feminism solely with people like Sarkeesian or women who antagonise males. There are a lot of different approaches.

#33 Edited by Black_Knight_00 (18177 posts) -

@loafofgame said:

@Black_Knight_00: Well, to keep it short (because I'll repeat myself otherwise): I agree equal opportunity is there, but I still think some questionable (and significant) attitudes remain that justify feminism. And you shouldn't associate feminism solely with people like Sarkeesian or women who antagonise males. There are a lot of different approaches.

In fact we should come up with a different name for these people. "Female supremacists" would do, I guess. As I said, they tarnish the good name of historical feminism.

#34 Posted by Pedro (21006 posts) -

@loafofgame said:

@Black_Knight_00: Well, to keep it short (because I'll repeat myself otherwise): I agree equal opportunity is there, but I still think some questionable (and significant) attitudes remain that justify feminism. And you shouldn't associate feminism solely with people like Sarkeesian or women who antagonise males. There are a lot of different approaches.

In fact we should come up with a different name for these people. "Female supremacists" would do, I guess. As I said, they tarnish the good name of historical feminism.

This is very true cause people like her are saboteurs to the ideals of feminism.

#35 Edited by Randolph (10423 posts) -

@Pedro said:

@Black_Knight_00 said:

@loafofgame said:

@Black_Knight_00: Well, to keep it short (because I'll repeat myself otherwise): I agree equal opportunity is there, but I still think some questionable (and significant) attitudes remain that justify feminism. And you shouldn't associate feminism solely with people like Sarkeesian or women who antagonise males. There are a lot of different approaches.

In fact we should come up with a different name for these people. "Female supremacists" would do, I guess. As I said, they tarnish the good name of historical feminism.

This is very true cause people like her are saboteurs to the ideals of feminism.

Like I said, she's the feminist Ray Comfort, because she has too much of an ego to realize she is actively driving people away from the cause she has decided to latch on to.

#36 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18177 posts) -
@Randolph said:

Like I said, she's the feminist Ray Comfort, because she has too much of an ego to realize she is actively driving people away from the cause she has decided to latch on to.

Quite a perfect analogy, considering that I'm positive Ray Comfort doesn't believe in any of the stuff he preaches and he's only in for the money: he simply found a golden goose and he's squeezing every penny out of it while he can. It would be fun when he retires if he came out as an atheist, like Marjoe Gortner.

#37 Edited by Jacanuk (3862 posts) -

@Randolph said:

@Pedro said:

@Black_Knight_00 said:

@loafofgame said:

@Black_Knight_00: Well, to keep it short (because I'll repeat myself otherwise): I agree equal opportunity is there, but I still think some questionable (and significant) attitudes remain that justify feminism. And you shouldn't associate feminism solely with people like Sarkeesian or women who antagonise males. There are a lot of different approaches.

In fact we should come up with a different name for these people. "Female supremacists" would do, I guess. As I said, they tarnish the good name of historical feminism.

This is very true cause people like her are saboteurs to the ideals of feminism.

Like I said, she's the feminist Ray Comfort, because she has too much of an ego to realize she is actively driving people away from the cause she has decided to latch on to.

Not even that, if you hear real female gamers who actually play games, they all pretty much think this chick is to much and seems to have a intense hate for anything male or has a smell of the male gender

But to be honest the whole feminine agenda has grown stale and smells of wanting to get things you are not really entitled to.

#38 Posted by Randolph (10423 posts) -

@Randolph said:

Like I said, she's the feminist Ray Comfort, because she has too much of an ego to realize she is actively driving people away from the cause she has decided to latch on to.

Quite a perfect analogy, considering that I'm positive Ray Comfort doesn't believe in any of the stuff he preaches and he's only in for the money: he simply found a golden goose and he's squeezing every penny out of it while he can. It would be fun when he retires if he came out as an atheist, like Marjoe Gortner.

That wouldn't shock me. The man has made himself a millionaire by lying to gullible people. This woman hasn't had quite that level of success, but she has certainly gained a level of notoriety that is entirely undeserved because she knows how to play her crowd like a harp from hell.

#39 Posted by Ish_basic (3964 posts) -

A recent experience I've had with a game (Path of Exile) has kinda helped me to understand the female side of this issue a little more. You can't design your character in PoE, you just choose from a group of six classes with predetermined character models. So I'm playing as the Templar, an old (silver hair and beard), exiled knight, and I just really like this concept of a Barristan Selmy-like character, dealing out damage with sword and shield. But he's got no pants! I'm wearing plate armor from the waist up and then nothing and then chainmail slippers. It turns what could be a bad-ass, seasoned knight into an Alzheimer's joke: "har, har, ol' Selmy's gone adventuring without his pants again." Not offended, just irked that the character is ruined by this silly design choice. So now I see why women get so upset with the scantily clad heroines.