....... The only feminist point in the whole review was that there maybe needed a female character that actually affected the plot after all, this is the 21st century and women are supposed to be our equals and this was a suggestion, not a really a hot topic, just a way to add an extra dimension, a topic of intelligent discussion .
Like I've stated in a previous post, the game is a satire on American culture and thus, its over exaggerates how women are portrayed, reality obsessed, home wreckers, necrotic etc etc. Having one a main "bad guy" as you stated wouldn't fit with the theme of the game. Equality is a two way street but misogynist views are all one way. Typical idiotic bandwagon post.
A intelligent rebuttal is welcome - a stupid comment on gender stereotypes, and misogynist views are not.
Although I guess this is what you get when 12 year olds get hold of the internet - 7/10 people shouting abuse on games like COD or message boards such as this are young children, those who lack the maturity and linguistics to put their opinion across, and those who really shouldn't be on said game or board in the first place.
And the whole bull about the feminist points spoiling the review is ridiculous! If you've played the game, you'll see that there is no female role model in the game. They are there for entertainment purposes and don't really add to the narrative. But this is done as the whole game is a satire of American Culture and thus, those aspects of femininity are exaggerated. Were these points dwelled on, no. Were they mentioned, yes. Was a suggestion that maybe one could have played a bigger, more serious role, yes. Did the review then become radical feminist propaganda..... no.
What happened to intelligent debate?! Tell me I'm wrong with a point, great. Your argument is invalid and you say you're gonna f**k my mother - grow up!
The subject of violence and its link towards human behaviour is an arguement that has been around since the time of printing press and as such, is nothing new. When researching my dissertation, this is the subject I chose to do. My research found that, just like this programme did, there's is no actual substantial evidence to support claims that violent behaviour is brought about because an individual is simulating an act of violence. My research found that the art of blame, and the need for simplistic answers to controversial questions leads to folk lores and demon hunts in which we have replaced unholy demons and the acts of the devil, with the risk of pedophiles and people becoming socially warped by their increased consumption of violent media.
This is however not to say that the media has no effect on us at all. If the media real didn't affect people then companies would not spend £100,000,000 yearly on advertising. Again my research came to the conclusion that the media does in fact affect us, however only in the way in which we are already inclined. By this i mean that, a car commercial would only affect my decision making on car purchasing, if I was already in the frame of mind to purchase a car. To put it simply, we use media to create and form identities for ourselves so if we are already violently inclined, we would use this violent media to create and learn ways in which we can become violent, although saying this, most people in society tend to be normal, level headed individuals so we tend to create identities which are more commonly present within the normal social sphere.
Just thought I'd add my say to an otherwise well rounded and enjoyable programme. Keep up the good work Cam!
RelinquoLamia's comments