Tropes vs Women

[Jared]

I tentatively disagree. She's high profile and people are aware of her, but her arguments are often poorly constructed and researched which is unfortunate. These are things that do deserve to be discussion points, but when she offers up extreme arguments that are easily countered (strawman arguments, if you will) it's difficult for her to be taken seriously by a lot of people.

People often say this. I really don't see it, but maybe I'm missing something. Could you give me some examples of which arguments you think are poorly constructed/researched?

One that really got me was using Hotline Miami is an example in her videos, as a 'damsel' that needs to be rescued and one that is 'killed off'. It doesn't make much sense aside from the most superficial level, where a guy rescues a woman at one point. Rescuing the woman is not the goal of the game (the level takes place near the start of the game and your assignment is actually to kill everybody in the house) You play a demented sociopathic killer who decides, seemingly arbitrarily to take mercy on the one character (who, yes, is the one female character in the game) It's worth noting that she doesn't express direct gratitude for the rescue - she stays in the hero's house since she apparently has nowhere else to go, but avoids him for half the missions and sleeps in another bed. She IS killed at the halfway point, but literally every single character in the game dies so using that as the basis for any claims of sexism in the game is ridiculous.

Another one leaping to mind is her strange argument that Elaine Marley is not an example of a positive, feminist character because she is not a playable character. Elaine is one of my favourite characters in the world of gaming and could definitely carry her own game and is always both a feminine AND strong character. (The only time you can argue she wasn't was in COMI where she does genuinely need rescuing but it's due entirely to a bizarre set of circumstances that is 100% Guybrush's fault)

Many people have noted factual errors in the stories she recounts. The main one I remember is her story of the development of StarFox Adventures being riddled with errors - the game was to have dual protagonists, and it was not co-opted into a new StarFox game because of 'fears gamers would not play a female protagonist' but simply because the StarFox creator liked the look of the game and wanted to put his own characters into it.

A lot of the targets she picks are also beyond soft. It's been pointed out that Dragon's Lair (if that was the title) was a very strange example, since the knight himself is scarcely a positive male character. Now, I understand that there is a rare, justified double standard here - that rounded female characters are of MUCH more importance to fiction than male because they have been so rare. But I think regardless you need to evaluate the role of males in a game's fictional world before condemning it's portrayal of women - some, in fact over the years probably most, games have simple, cartoonish visions of all humanity. Yes, in Double Dragon the girl exists purely to get punched in the stomach and kidnapped - but Jimmy and Billy Lee likewise exist solely to punch other men who look equally as lopsided and troglodytic as themselves. The recent Dragon's Crown has received a lot of attention for the Sorceress and Amazon models being grossly distorted and oversexualised, while the barbarian and dwarf models are just as bad.

I'm also slightly dubious about the 'massive campaign' against her. Maybe I stick to the more genteel areas of the internet, I don't know, but I've seen basically no abuse of Anita Sarkeesian. I've seen plenty of well constructed posts countering and debating things she has said and a couple of joke images (Her with some tangled up Christmas lights and a message saying "I bet the Patriarchy did this" - stuff like that) but nothing genuinely hateful. Due to the fact that she's done so much work disabling comments I can't evaluate for myself - I don't want to be unkind to her but I'm sceptical whenever somebody makes complaints about 'trolls' and 'abuse'. Having put up with plenty of abuse myself I have little patience for thin-skinned people and most people are prone to exaggerate the level of trolling around.

Again, sorry, I'm a little confused. Are you saying that because you haven't seen it in your circles, it doesn't exist? All this is documented on her website: http://www.feministfrequency.com/2012/07/image-based-harassment-and-visual-misogyny/

No, I'm saying that it's hard for me to judge because I've only heard references to it from her. I'm glad she saved it on a page so I can actually read it and evaluate it. I feel I stand corrected, as she has legitimate grievances here. Particularly here in Australia the media tend to over-react to online 'trolls' so I take these claims with a pinch of salt, but the domestic abuse simulator is quite sickening.

[waheela]

Many people have noted factual errors in the stories she recounts. The main one I remember is her story of the development of StarFox Adventures being riddled with errors - the game was to have dual protagonists, and it was not co-opted into a new StarFox game because of 'fears gamers would not play a female protagonist' but simply because the StarFox creator liked the look of the game and wanted to put his own characters into it.

Hmmm, I went back to the first Damsel in Distress video to see if I could find what you were talking about, but I couldn't find anything in the video to back up what you were saying. In the video, she says the following:

Let's start with a story of a game that no one ever got to play. Back in 1999 game developer RARE was hard at work on a new original title for the Nintendo 64 called “Dinosaur Planet”. The game was to star a 16 year old hero named Krystal as one of the two playable protagonists. She was tasked with traveling through time, fighting prehistoric monsters with her magical staff and saving the world. She was strong, she was capable and she was heroic.

In addition to this, nowhere in the video does she say that this occurred because of "fears gamers would not play a female protagonist". She merely says Miyamoto joked that it would make a good third installment of Star Fox, and so development began.

Another one leaping to mind is her strange argument that Elaine Marley is not an example of a positive, feminist character because she is not a playable character. Elaine is one of my favourite characters in the world of gaming and could definitely carry her own game and is always both a feminine AND strong character. (The only time you can argue she wasn't was in COMI where she does genuinely need rescuing but it's due entirely to a bizarre set of circumstances that is 100% Guybrush's fault)

Again, here's all she says on this:

There is a clear difference between sexist parody and parody of sexism. Sexist parody encourages the players to mock and trivialize gender issues while parody of sexism disrupts the status quo and undermines regressive gender conventions. So for instance when wannabe pirate Guybrush Threepwood finally reaches the kidnapped Elaine Marley in the 1990 adventure game The Secret of Monkey Island, she already has a plan to escape and he ruins it with his attempt to rescue her. The joke ends up being directed at the protagonist, rather than making fun the damsel'ed woman... While these types of games are a refreshing departure from the standard formula, and something I'd generally like to see more of, the focus is still squarely on the male characters and so at their core these games are really deconstructing the player's assumptions about the traditional hero archetype. A true subversion of the trope would need to star the damsel as the main playable character. It would have to be her story. Sadly, there are very few games that really explore this idea.

I don't see anywhere in this where she is criticizing Marley for not being a positive, feminist character. She is saying that despite this being a game that breaks away from the "damsel in distress" trope, it is still a game centered around a male character that focuses more on deconstructing the player's assumptions of what a male hero should be. This is her interpretation at least, and we're welcome to disagree with her opinion on this. I do feel however, that you misrepresented what she said in her video a little.

One that really got me was using Hotline Miami is an example in her videos, as a 'damsel' that needs to be rescued and one that is 'killed off'. It doesn't make much sense aside from the most superficial level, where a guy rescues a woman at one point. Rescuing the woman is not the goal of the game (the level takes place near the start of the game and your assignment is actually to kill everybody in the house) You play a demented sociopathic killer who decides, seemingly arbitrarily to take mercy on the one character (who, yes, is the one female character in the game) It's worth noting that she doesn't express direct gratitude for the rescue - she stays in the hero's house since she apparently has nowhere else to go, but avoids him for half the missions and sleeps in another bed. She IS killed at the halfway point, but literally every single character in the game dies so using that as the basis for any claims of sexism in the game is ridiculous

I do actually agree with you on this. Having played Hotline Miami, I don't really think of it as a prime example of the "damsel in distress" trope, although I can see how it may be interpreted that way. I feel this one's a bit opinion-based though, and not really something one could use as a prime example of why Sarkeesian's videos are poorly constructed and researched.

But I think regardless you need to evaluate the role of males in a game's fictional world before condemning it's portrayal of women - some, in fact over the years probably most, games have simple, cartoonish visions of all humanity. Yes, in Double Dragon the girl exists purely to get punched in the stomach and kidnapped - but Jimmy and Billy Lee likewise exist solely to punch other men who look equally as lopsided and troglodytic as themselves. The recent Dragon's Crown has received a lot of attention for the Sorceress and Amazon models being grossly distorted and oversexualised, while the barbarian and dwarf models are just as bad.

I understand what you're saying here, but I think you're missing the point of her videos, which is to examine the tropes, plot devices and patterns within games pertaining to women specifically on a big picture scale. I don't really think deconstructing male roles within a few of the more cartoonish games she discusses pertains to the overall pattern of women's roles in video games.

[LimpingFish]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJeX6F-Q63I&list=PLQJW3WMsx1q3BAZh3XsK1cSwCiaqjSulc

A counter-argument...of sorts.

[waheela]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJeX6F-Q63I&list=PLQJW3WMsx1q3BAZh3XsK1cSwCiaqjSulc

A counter-argument...of sorts.

Do you agree with this video, LimpingFish? Or are you playing devil's advocate?

[Yeppoh]

Genuine question here. Why is it that Miss Sarkeesian's videos are so easily misinterpreted by, what I could see, a major lot of people? I read/watched a bunch of lectures, thesis and research papers, also I checked - always out of curiosity - to see the reaction of the people when I could. So generally it's not something that happens with a well researched and constructed lecture - even a controversial one that touches the status quo. If the point and message of a lecture get mostly through to all parties (pro and detractors alike), it means it was correctly written. That's my personal observation though.
I'm rather confused (and probably naive) of the difference between the message that people seem to get and what Miss Sarkeesian actually says.

[wisnoskij]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJeX6F-Q63I&list=PLQJW3WMsx1q3BAZh3XsK1cSwCiaqjSulc

A counter-argument...of sorts.

Only watched the first 10 minutes, but I think I understand the two arguments.

The feminist one actually seems slightly better argued. But completely missing the part were the weak and ineffective female breaks that 20 foot tall armoured man with the gigantic punch to the balls is pretty bad. I think the man really goes not question enough, and takes too many feminist beliefs as correct without testing them, and therefore really fails to counter her arguments well enough.

[Trapezoid]

Reminder of what Myinah posted on the second page: "Her videos are also designed to be used in a classroom setting or as a teaching aid for parents and kids. They aren't flashy, but they are rich in content and easy to pause and explain and so it makes more sense when you view them as a teaching aid."

Basically, it's like creationists barging in on lecture about the evolutionary history of Amazon parrots, and complaining that it's not convincing them that evolution is real in the first place. That is not the talk's function.

Her videos aren't meant to make a convincing argument--they're not Loose Change or Ancient Aliens--they're a pretty basic application of feminist media critique to video games. She's really not saying anything that other people haven't been saying for years about movies, television, books.
It's just extra touchy because GaMeRz are, well, touchy about their timesink of choice. Think about how easy (and entertaining) it is to troll provoke gamers by saying "Games Aren't Art." That insecurity, coupled with ignorance of the history of feminist theory and a general unfamiliarity with the sound of a woman speaking, leads to a weird and over-passionate urge to take her down.

[wisnoskij]

But that does not seem to be most people problems with her arguments, Trapezoid.
Most people seem to find that her analysis were just shallow and cherry picked.

[kaput]

E: Pointless rant was pointless. I really don't know why I bother

[Trapezoid]

But that does not seem to be most people problems with her arguments, Trapezoid.

Oh, nobody's gonna admit that's why they're upset with her, or even be conscious of it. They'll think up some other reason via the magic of Rationalization.

(I know this not because I'm a feminist but because I'm a guy. I've in the past been the snotty contrarian, made uncomfortable by feminism and attempting to assign logic to my discomfort after the fact.)

[Babar]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJeX6F-Q63I&list=PLQJW3WMsx1q3BAZh3XsK1cSwCiaqjSulc

A counter-argument...of sorts.

Only watched the first 10 minutes, but I think I understand the two arguments.

The feminist one actually seems slightly better argued. But completely missing the part were the weak and ineffective female breaks that 20 foot tall armoured man with the gigantic punch to the balls is pretty bad. I think the man really goes not question enough, and takes too many feminist beliefs as correct without testing them, and therefore really fails to counter her arguments well enough.

Okay, Anita was one level of preachy condescension, but that thunderf00t guy was something beyond. I too could barely watch 10 minutes of his video, and his constant repeating of the woman punching the giant lich thing irked me at its dishonesty. In Double Dragon Neon, the game being talked about, the final boss is that guy, after beating it up, you punch it off a cliff, and the credits roll, with the it in the background. After about 5 minutes, by which time most people would've exited the game,  the credits finish, the lich-thing almost reaches the floor, says "I'll get you, Billy and Jimmy!", except the girl is there, and she "punches it in the balls". The screen fades, and your final concept art is unlocked: Billy carrying his adoring girlfriend who he just saved.

So yeah, that doesn't disprove anything Anita said about that particular trope, she even mentioned that occasionally the damsel does her token end-of-game "defence".

The discussions here have been kinda odd. Nobody seems to deny that there is a certainly level of misogyny (or at least male-centric targeting to the detriment of women) in games, but loads of people really seem to dislike the way Anita expresses herself.

[Ryan Timothy B]

I've seen a few people (and that thunderf00t guy) commenting on her pink clothing, makeup and girly earrings - compared to her old videos. I imagine she changed this to enforce to the viewer that she is in fact a true female in a world of sexual dimorphism. Where she's trying to show to the viewer that she IS clearly a female and accepts the differences between men and women. If she were wearing all gray with no makeup, people would likely then say "She's a lesbian or misgendered female; therefor her points are moot".

Men have to pay more for car insurance because men in general drive more recklessly, which sucks but then again is just another tragic consequence of how we are supposed to act and behave (young men are encouraged by each other to drive fast)

The problem with this is that you're also believing in the sexist views that men drive more recklessly than women. The other factor that insurance companies use to base these sexist views of men vs women drivers are speeding tickets. It's shown that men receive more speeding tickets than women, but this is where I get upset. I know several dozen women that tell me they've never received a speeding ticket. Not because they don't speed and don't get pulled over, but merely because the police officer let them off with a warning. When I have asked dozens of men, I rarely hear of them receiving a warning.

My belief on this is that the majority of police officers are men. Men are generally more lenient and polite towards women. This is my own personal beliefs because I notice it in myself as well.

In the dozen years I've been driving and received many many speeding tickets, I've actually only received one warning instead of the actual ticket. In this one instance the police officer was actually a woman (the first woman police officer I've ever encountered on the road). It can't be a coincidence.

When I was 18, there was this girl I worked with who was a year younger. She was in 2 massive car accidents (one where her car swerved and hit another car, then pushed them both off the road where her car flipped and was completely totaled). Both accidents were her fault. But the thing that pissed me off was that after these accidents, even a year later to allow for rate adjustments, she was still paying 1/3 of what I was paying - where I had zero accidents or tickets.

I'm sure Anita would love to discuss this, since it's a perfect example of what she's trying to say (treating genders differently is destructive), but I guess she was simply focusing on games and media in that video.

I wasn't actually serious about her debating this issue, I was mostly saying her discussions are completely "feminist" and that if she took a neutral position on things, I may actually have more respect for her.

Edit: On a side-note, I've recently learned she was born in Ontario, which is pretty cool.

[wisnoskij]

My belief on this is that the majority of police officers are men. Men are generally more lenient and polite towards women. This is my own personal beliefs because I notice it in myself as well.

Well if we are being ultra politically correct here. I think it would be more prudent to have the belief that society in general imbues women with less responsibility, and that is the reason for a reduced number of tickets. Not that men seek out authority and action filled jobs, and treat women with more politeness (while not seeking out more action in their driving habits).

[Calin Leafshade]

(Edited by moderator)

monkey_05_06 wrote a post, since deleted:

While these types of games are a refreshing departure from the standard formula, and something I'd generally like to see more of, the focus is still squarely on the male characters and so at their core these games are really deconstructing the player's assumptions about the traditional hero archetype. A true subversion of the trope would need to star the damsel as the main playable character. It would have to be her story.

What? Did she really say this? [offensive comment]

"Nope. Can't be feminist unless a female is the protagonist and defeats all the male characters by herself without any assistance from any male characters. Derp derp herp."

[monkey0506]

Now put it in your signature forever, plzkthxbai.

[Trapezoid]

While these types of games are a refreshing departure from the standard formula, and something I'd generally like to see more of, the focus is still squarely on the male characters and so at their core these games are really deconstructing the player's assumptions about the traditional hero archetype. A true subversion of the trope would need to star the damsel as the main playable character. It would have to be her story.

What? Did she really say this? [offensive comment]

"Nope. Can't be feminist unless a female is the protagonist and defeats all the male characters by herself without any assistance from any male characters. Derp derp herp."

Wow, you really said this, go to hell.

There's nothing offensive about what she said. There are games that subvert or play with the trope, but still exist within the constructs of male-oriented storytelling. A game can contribute to the forest of misogyny even if it's not a particularly misogynistic tree. That's hardly saying "Burn in Hell Ron Gilbert." It's more akin to the way that a feminist movie can still fail the Bechdel test, a test which aims to expose an overall trend, not to vilify individual films.

[Scavenger]

Oh wow, I was keeping out of this one. Looks like I broke my word to myself.

While these types of games are a refreshing departure from the standard formula, and something I'd generally like to see more of, the focus is still squarely on the male characters and so at their core these games are really deconstructing the player's assumptions about the traditional hero archetype. A true subversion of the trope would need to star the damsel as the main playable character. It would have to be her story.

What? Did she really say this? [offensive comment]

Don't say that. Even in jest, don't say that.

And is it so wrong to ask for more games with a female lead, that focuses on them being the badass, instead of a badass or lumbering male who gets upstaged by a lady? Why not play as an Elaine Marley, planning out the metaphorical monkeys in a dress (not exactly that situation, as it is a joke that needs obscuring to work, but other stuff)? Is it that much to ask that the woman be in the spotlight, rather than in a supporting role?

While the delivery isn't perfect, so what, the sentiment is clear. "I would like to play as a woman more often in an inspiring role". She didn't ask for LESS of anything, nor for WOMAN BEATS THE MENS. She asked for more heroic women. Heck, the example game she states is an example of subversion (instead of deconstruction) of the trope in action.

Heck, that's something I can get behind. There are certain groups of people that never get representation in videogames - for instance, I can count the number of fat heroic protagonists in games on one hand. They sometimes (SOMETIMES!) get representation as a plucky sidekick (Hello Paige of Beyond Good and Evil), but being in the spotlight? Never. It wouldn't sell. Noone wants to play as that.

And for women, it's more than that. It's being relegated to the back seat, to the supporting role, 90% of the time when you're 50% of the population. There just aren't that many heroic female protagonists compared to the number of male ones, and what she is saying is "I would like more representation for my gender, please. I'd like a bigger slice of that hero pie for my gender." while the male heroes are gorging themselves on the 90%+ of the hero pie and saying "YOU HAVE A SLICE DON'T YOU?! DON'T COMPLAIN."

And if "I would like some more female heroes, not just female npcs that are badass, though that is a cool thing too." is a particularily worthy sentiment to respond with a rape joke, then I'm not sure what planet I'm living on.

Jesus Christ. Why do people have to make even the most simple requests an attack on them?

"herp derp i want mans to be hero save the world from evil wimminz coz they be stoping our man stuf" is just as ridiculous.

Noone is suggesting that.

Noone.

They just want more capable female protagonists, as varied as the ones males get to have.

Is that so hard to understand?!

[Snarky]

Moderator note:

monkey's comment was out of line even as a joke, and moderator action has been taken. The post has been deleted and the offending line edited out of the responses.

Rape threats, even idle, facetious ones, are in clear violation of the forum rule: "No threats or aggressive hate speech." They will not be tolerated.

Other participants, there's no need to directly respond further to a provocation.

[Yeppoh]

While the delivery isn't perfect, so what, the sentiment is clear. "I would like to play as a woman more often in an inspiring role". She didn't ask for LESS of anything, nor for WOMAN BEATS THE MENS. She asked for more heroic women. Heck, the example game she states is an example of subversion (instead of deconstruction) of the trope in action.

Still. 3 videos to present that sentiment, even if the "Damsel in Distress" trope is an interesting subject that takes its share of time to talk about, confused more people than it should. I say her videos are functional for that extent. Neither good nor bad. Just functional. Although I wished more thorough revisions on her drafts to put more weight on points people seem to have missed. To me, it gives the feeling she didn't prooftest her lecture enough with the target audience, but only with some people who already was agreeing with her sentiment.

[waheela]

Genuine question here. Why is it that Miss Sarkeesian's videos are so easily misinterpreted by, what I could see, a major lot of people? I read/watched a bunch of lectures, thesis and research papers, also I checked - always out of curiosity - to see the reaction of the people when I could. So generally it's not something that happens with a well researched and constructed lecture - even a controversial one that touches the status quo. If the point and message of a lecture get mostly through to all parties (pro and detractors alike), it means it was correctly written. That's my personal observation though.
I'm rather confused (and probably naive) of the difference between the message that people seem to get and what Miss Sarkeesian actually says.

To answer your question, I think people project their own ideas about what she is saying based on knowing beforehand that she's a feminist and she's critiquing their one true love (gaming and gaming culture). It was very obvious to me this was the case when watching LimpingFish's video. There were a lot of points in which Thunderf00t's arguments boiled down to "some feminists say this, so this is what Sarkeesian thinks and says. She is so stupid". I think this is one of the reasons why this quote was misinterpreted so heavily in this thread:

While these types of games are a refreshing departure from the standard formula, and something I'd generally like to see more of, the focus is still squarely on the male characters and so at their core these games are really deconstructing the player's assumptions about the traditional hero archetype. A true subversion of the trope would need to star the damsel as the main playable character. It would have to be her story. Sadly, there are very few games that really explore this idea.

She is very clearly discussing the trope in this quote, not the heroine. Yet immediately people jump to the conclusion that Sarkeesian is saying Elaine Marley is not a strong female character because of this. I think people unconsciously do want to misunderstand and thus discredit her on some level, because she is criticizing something we hold very close to our hearts. I notice I had the same reaction to some of her critiques too. ("How can she say this about that game!? That was such a good game!")

Another quote from Sarkeesian:

This series will include critical analysis of many beloved games and characters, but remember that it is both possible (and even necessary) to simultaneously enjoy media while also being critical of it's more problematic or pernicious aspects.