From what I've seen of her, she's not someone worthy of promoting. She is rude and condescending, ignores any legitimate criticism of herself, and the particular feminist views she holds aren't representative of main stream feminism - she has some rather firm views that are prudish and hostile, eg she seems very sex negative. Most feminists I've seen seem a lot more relaxed than her about woman in games being attractive.
Not to mention her using other peoples' footage in videos without permission or credit, and her misrepresenting the games she shows. Her career is being a feminist critic and she profits from attention, she has every incentive to represent individual games as being sexist even if they aren't. And the worst part is that she hasn't become big and influential just because loads of normal people like her work, she receives lots of promotion from games sites like this, perhaps people who assume in good faith that her being a feminist means she is worth listening to without scrutinising her actual work. Most people aren't interested in her, she is some forced celebrity.
She is a poor example to those interested in feminism, a poor role model for women, a dishonest critic and not someone who deserves promotion. She is a reactionary who thrives on generating controversy, and profits from making things out to be sexist no matter if they actually are. And because games sites have elevated her status, her judgments have influence and games developers feel compelled to listen to her. I'm sure she does say some sensible and meaningful stuff, but that's incredibly easy to do. Anyone can read some feminist discourse, learn the language and ideas and slap out some content.
Still, to those of you wondering why GS is writing about her, look at the amount of traffic this article has generated. Controversial posts are always the ones with the most comments!
@chriss_m: I think that Byshop did not explain himself very clearly and has given the wrong impression. First and foremost, criticising the social justice crowd or feminists is not against the rules here; it never has been and I sure as hell hope it never will be. If any moderator told you that was the case, then it's certainly not something that was discussed with the whole moderator team.
That being said, I don't think that's the message Byshop was trying to convey. Feminism are social justice are political and sociological ideologies; like all such ideologies, anyone has the right to follow them, and people do so to varying extent. Some are reasonably open minded and rational, others are stubbon and narrow-minded with an "us vs them" mentality. It is normal and healthy to apply scrutiny to these groups even if they ostensibly exist to promote a good cause, as giving them protection is something that may be exploited by those who are malicious or even just clumsy. Personally I think that while these ideologies do talk some sense every now and then, there are a number of bad people who adopt a social justice persona to give themselves power over others and to obscure their own unsavoury traits. So no, there is nothing wrong with being critical of feminism or social justice and I for one think that no online community has any business declaring otherwise.
What I believe Byshop was trying to get at is that going off on a rant blaming these people involves pointing a finger at a very large number of people, the majority of whom may not even have any idea what has happened or may consider it an overreaction. In this case it is not even clear who influenced the developers to change the game, or even if they just decided to do it themselves after making a misjudgement. The article refers to discussions such as those among fans on reddit, and there is no telling who among these people is a feminist or social justice advocate.
What we hope to see here on GameSpot is discussion that is of a reasonable quality and is open and honest. Forbidding people from criticising Feminism or any other ideology would obviously be counterintuitive. But if the discussion becomes dominated by people all complaining about a single group of people when it isn't relevant, then that disrupts open discussion, because it fosters hositlity and tribalism instead. Whether it's social democrats condemning all conservatives as bad people, or folks on GS saying all feminists are evil, making blanket criticisms makes open minded people of an opposing ideology become defensive and retreat into being told what they want to hear by like minded people. And that is how what could have been a decent discussion turns into endless bickering.
The most important thing to remember is that every person who expresses an opinion is an individual with the ability to think whatever they choose and act accordingly. What label they choose to adopt is relatively unimportant, not least because it's determined by their own understanding of what the label means, not what everyone else thinks it means. People adopt labels largely for their own sake, to give themselves a sense of identity and meaning, rather than for anyone else's benefit. If people say or do things worthy of criticism, then contain your criticism to those people as individuals and not whatever word they use to describe themselves.
Lastly, if anyone reading this feels they have been moderated unfairly, take it to the Ask the Mods forum. Be patient and polite, and feel free to ask for the opinion of another moderator or the community manager if you're not happy. And don't assume nefarious intent when a mistake or misunderstanding is the far more likely explanation; we're only human and make misjudgements like everyone else.
Showing off a butt slap seems a pretty minor thing to edit a game for. Sometimes there are things in Japanese media that are really not appropriate for western release such as sexualization of children, but a butt slap is pretty tame. I guess they didn't want to invoke the ire of Polygon. People who don't like the character can choose not to play as her, issue solved.
I remember DOA2 changed what you saw in the game depending on what you set your age to be, so younger players wouldn't see a scene of naked Kasumi being cloned. I don't see a problem with that, nor having a male character who is sexualized so players who like men can have someone to drool over.
I liked it. The visuals great and the story was a decent enough revival of SW - not well-explained in parts but perhaps deliberate to make it accessible to new fans. I really didn't like Rey (partly because of how annoying her accent is) and thought they gave Finn a hard time - I wanted to like Finn, but every time he seemed useful or had some strength they had to ruin it and make him look pathetic. That being said, I hated Kylo Ren about half way through the movie but came to like him by the end, somehow, so maybe the sequels will change my opinion of Rey and Finn.
I believe John Lewis have some price-match scheme meaning that if you show them amazon's price they'll lower their price to match it but still give a 2 year guarantee (the amazon link only provides 1 year). I'm not sure if this is all the case so do your own research.
Thanks for the review Kevin, so glad I didn't pre-order this. I think I would have regretted buying it, especially since I don't have a PS4 or an Xbone.
I think you should read what the first amendment actually says.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances"
Nowhere does it say that a privately run website can't enforce its own rules. All it says is the government can't restrict freedom of speech.
EJ902's comments