Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 5810
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby sardia » Sat Jul 27, 2013 4:50 pm UTC

jestingrabbit wrote:
TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:Kind of a moot point if she isn't actually playing anything.


her proposal wrote:I love playing video games


Is there a particular reason we're assuming bad faith on her part?

It's a common attack that only those who know, work in, or generally use the item in question can dare criticize it.

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby Princess Marzipan » Sat Jul 27, 2013 4:56 pm UTC

If she's making bad arguments, attack them. This line of attack is pure political bullshit serving to deflect attention away from the substance of her argument and shift discussion into the nuances of source crediting.

For an example of invalidating bad arguments:

There is a sense here that using others' footage means she didn't play games. That's an unfounded logical leap: There is no need for her to record herself playing the game in order to analyze it while playing. If she played the games to analyze them, any footage could easily have involved a lot of pausing or inaction while she took notes. This isn't a documentary about her personal video game exploits, it's about the games themselves.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25789
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby gmalivuk » Sat Jul 27, 2013 5:32 pm UTC

sardia wrote:
jestingrabbit wrote:
TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:Kind of a moot point if she isn't actually playing anything.
her proposal wrote:I love playing video games
Is there a particular reason we're assuming bad faith on her part?
It's a common attack that only those who know, work in, or generally use the item in question can dare criticize it.
More to the point, though, is that we don't really know whether she played the games in question. Using others' LP clips doesn't mean she didn't play the games herself, it just means she isn't using video of her own playing.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Sat Jul 27, 2013 5:40 pm UTC

jestingrabbit, I don't mean to assume bad faith. I just mean that, if she wasn't actually playing anything, the point about getting money to reimburse her for playing time is moot. But I agree that the evidence she didn't play anything is pretty weak.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

Derek
Posts: 2148
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:15 am UTC

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby Derek » Sat Jul 27, 2013 7:53 pm UTC

Lucrece wrote:The average "short" AAA game is 40 hours. RPG's and other immersive games can easily give you 70. I squeezed out about 100+ hours from skyrim. Take out a work schedule of 8-9 hours a day. A single 40 hour game is a week's worth of work. That's just playing the game, not researching or producing the videos.

That has pretty much never been true. RPGs are the only genre that has commonly taken that long for a single playthrough. Arcade and early console games typically took a couple hours if you knew what you were doing. Modern adventure and shooter games usually range from 5-15, maybe 20 if it's a long game or you're slow. An open ended or sandbox game could take any amount of time, but you probably only need a few hours to get a good idea. Which brings up another good point: I don't think most games need to be played to completion. I would say five hours or so would be enough time to get a good idea of the gameplay. You can get the rest of the story from summaries or let's plays. Playing the whole thing is preferable, but I think there is definitely some diminishing returns there.

There is a sense here that using others' footage means she didn't play games. That's an unfounded logical leap: There is no need for her to record herself playing the game in order to analyze it while playing. If she played the games to analyze them, any footage could easily have involved a lot of pausing or inaction while she took notes. This isn't a documentary about her personal video game exploits, it's about the games themselves.

Yeah, this is what the original article seemed to be trying to hint at, but it doesn't work. If she used an LPer's footage, she should credit them, but this is totally unrelated to whether or not she played the game herself. I wouldn't even expect her to use her own footage for the documentary, it's probably not very interesting to watch and there is much better footage out there.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby Lucrece » Sun Jul 28, 2013 4:43 am UTC

Derek wrote:
Lucrece wrote:The average "short" AAA game is 40 hours. RPG's and other immersive games can easily give you 70. I squeezed out about 100+ hours from skyrim. Take out a work schedule of 8-9 hours a day. A single 40 hour game is a week's worth of work. That's just playing the game, not researching or producing the videos.

That has pretty much never been true. RPGs are the only genre that has commonly taken that long for a single playthrough. Arcade and early console games typically took a couple hours if you knew what you were doing. Modern adventure and shooter games usually range from 5-15, maybe 20 if it's a long game or you're slow. An open ended or sandbox game could take any amount of time, but you probably only need a few hours to get a good idea. Which brings up another good point: I don't think most games need to be played to completion. I would say five hours or so would be enough time to get a good idea of the gameplay. You can get the rest of the story from summaries or let's plays. Playing the whole thing is preferable, but I think there is definitely some diminishing returns there.

There is a sense here that using others' footage means she didn't play games. That's an unfounded logical leap: There is no need for her to record herself playing the game in order to analyze it while playing. If she played the games to analyze them, any footage could easily have involved a lot of pausing or inaction while she took notes. This isn't a documentary about her personal video game exploits, it's about the games themselves.

Yeah, this is what the original article seemed to be trying to hint at, but it doesn't work. If she used an LPer's footage, she should credit them, but this is totally unrelated to whether or not she played the game herself. I wouldn't even expect her to use her own footage for the documentary, it's probably not very interesting to watch and there is much better footage out there.


Yeah, no. Maybe if you don't play for completion, but I do.

I played Zelda Skyward sword, using guides because I was lazy, playing sometimes 6 hours a day. It was easily 40 hours, and I didn't even do the hardmode playthrough.I also find it questionable that you can clear games like Arkham Asylum alongside all the challenges and hidden rewards/puzzles in under 40 hours. And I've seen plenty of youtube playthroughs on it.It may be the case for the average brainless shooter game that tends to be thin on story and nuance, but it certainly isn't for quality adventure/RPG games.

I do know Mario Galaxy took me more than 30 hours to clear all the bonus content. In MG2 it took a fair bit to unlock visiting Rosalina again. There are many games where bonus scenes or encounters or universe detail take completion.

Sure, you can skim through the content, but then I think you lose ground in making claims about the game because understanding the context and universe of the game is rather important, and that only improves the more carefully you explore the game.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

Derek
Posts: 2148
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:15 am UTC

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby Derek » Sun Jul 28, 2013 5:27 am UTC

Yeah I wasn't talking about a 100% completion. Just a normal completion through the single player.

The Mighty Thesaurus
In your library, eating your students
Posts: 4399
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 7:47 am UTC
Location: The Daily Bugle

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby The Mighty Thesaurus » Sun Jul 28, 2013 5:40 am UTC

Most people don't even bother with that
LE4dGOLEM wrote:your ability to tell things from things remains one of your skills.
Weeks wrote:Not only can you tell things from things, you can recognize when a thing is a thing

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25789
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby gmalivuk » Sun Jul 28, 2013 5:54 am UTC

If a normal completion takes less than 20 hours, and I spent more than about $20 on the game, it feels like a ripoff to me.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

Derek
Posts: 2148
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:15 am UTC

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby Derek » Sun Jul 28, 2013 7:43 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:If a normal completion takes less than 20 hours, and I spent more than about $20 on the game, it feels like a ripoff to me.

I find that the length of a game is actually a relatively small factor in how good the game is. Definitely a sub-linear correlation. For example, Portal takes maybe 4 hours for a new player to complete, but it is one of the best games ever made.

Honestly, I have more money than time. I would rather have an amazing 5 hours than a good, but not spectacular, 20 hours.

User avatar
Woopate
Scrapple
Posts: 503
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:34 am UTC

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby Woopate » Sun Jul 28, 2013 8:47 am UTC

I think that the runtime for a completionist playthrough and the length of time it takes to get a gist of the tropes present in a game are not necessarily comparable. Certainly it's a rare game that unlocking all the achievements changes the damsel in distress narrative.

I am a little saddened by people grasping at any possible avenue to criticize Anita Sarkeesian. I think that there is a much more worthwhile discussion that could (and is being talked about to a degree) be useful if it weren't being hidden under things like this.

There may be a point in the argument that she should credit her sources, or at least request permission to use the footage. There is definitely nothing wrong with using the footage in and of itself. If every documentary or educational film was required to use the footage that they used to initially discover or research the thing they were portraying, well, there would be far fewer educational films.

One thing I am noticing from all this controversy is a discussion that is emerging and is extremely worthwhile, except it's about the problems with crowd funding and how it must evolve as a revenue stream.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10135
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby Tyndmyr » Sun Jul 28, 2013 1:41 pm UTC

Princess Marzipan wrote:If she's making bad arguments, attack them. This line of attack is pure political bullshit serving to deflect attention away from the substance of her argument and shift discussion into the nuances of source crediting.

For an example of invalidating bad arguments:

There is a sense here that using others' footage means she didn't play games. That's an unfounded logical leap: There is no need for her to record herself playing the game in order to analyze it while playing. If she played the games to analyze them, any footage could easily have involved a lot of pausing or inaction while she took notes. This isn't a documentary about her personal video game exploits, it's about the games themselves.


Not particularly. I care about sourcing. I do not care either way about the content of her videos. Demonstrating sexism and such in video games seems like a trivial objective to me. I've played video games. The sexist themes in many are...not exactly subtle. So, while I'm interested in discussing sourcing, kickstarter, expectations, etc, I'm not really interested in retreading that tired old ground.

gmalivuk wrote:If a normal completion takes less than 20 hours, and I spent more than about $20 on the game, it feels like a ripoff to me.


I don't really demand long play times...It depends on the quality of the game. If it's really fantastic, like, say, Bastion, then I don't care that it's possible to complete it fairly rapidly. In fact, the games with really long playtimes, I'm kind of unlikely to finish. Skyrim is a solid game, but I'm just never going to get the time to go through it all.

However, I wouldn't demand 100% completion to review a game. I highly doubt professional game reviewers do that, even. Playing a game for a couple of hours can get you a pretty good taste for it, IMO. The gain in knowledge from not playing to playing it for a couple of hours is going to be vastly more than going from playing it a couple of hours to playing it to completion.

However, it is hard to demonstrate evidence of absence of something. It is possible that she played these games, but chose not to use her own video. *shrug* I agree that absence of video showing her playing is evidence, but fairly weak evidence.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5649
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby Diadem » Sun Jul 28, 2013 2:08 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:If a normal completion takes less than 20 hours, and I spent more than about $20 on the game, it feels like a ripoff to me.

That seems to hugely depend on the replay value. A normal play through of a game like civilization probably takes 5 hours or so, but the game has endless replay value. Heck, there's multiplayer games out there were a single 'play through' takes like 20 minutes, but they are still good games.

Also, to come back to an earlier point in the thread:
gmalivuk wrote:
Diadem wrote:Looking at her videos, I'm not surprised people are wondering what she spent all that money on. It obviously wasn't these videos.

Let's hope she's planning to spend most of it on future projects. Otherwise I'll be reluctantly forced to conclude that she's a charlatan who abused a good cause to get rich quickly.

Took advantage of, perhaps, but when other people voluntarily gave her almost 30 times what she asked for, it's a bit of a stretch to say she was abusing anything.

That's a good point. I had forgotten that she had in fact asked for much less than she got. I suppose that's a tricky question in fundraisers - what to do with excess money. There's only so much you can spend on a single project, and you can't really expect someone to dedicate the rest of his life to similar projects just because you gave him money. Just keeping the money doesn't seem entirely fair either though. I have no idea what a good solution is. This is hardly the first fundraiser ever though. Is there some kind of general etiquette regarding this?
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25789
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby gmalivuk » Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:23 pm UTC

My 20 hour figure isn't universal, and isn't necessarily for a single playthrough of a game. It's more a "play until I feel like I've played enough" time. For some games, that's once through to the end. For others, it's two or three times through, exploring different possibilities each time. For multiplayer games, it's usually several bouts or rounds or whatever, trying out different characters and such each time.

But yeah, of course it also depends a lot on the quality of the time spent. I wasn't disappointed at spending 8 hours playing through Portal 2 single player, but felt like Rage ended disappointingly after 24 or so.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
folkhero
Posts: 1775
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:34 am UTC

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby folkhero » Sun Jul 28, 2013 7:44 pm UTC

jestingrabbit wrote:Is there a particular reason we're assuming bad faith on her part?

The discussion went something like this:
"Some people are saying that she didn't play the games."
"Well you don't have to play the games to critique them in the way that she was doing."
"But she explicitly said in her kickstarter that she was going to play lots of games, so if she didn't then it is kind of a problem."

I don't think anyone was saying for sure that she didn't play the games, more arguing against people saying that it doesn't matter if she played the game or not.
To all law enforcement entities, this is not an admission of guilt...

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 8748
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Jul 29, 2013 10:43 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:If a normal completion takes less than 20 hours, and I spent more than about $20 on the game, it feels like a ripoff to me.


No Deus Ex for you? Took about 15 hours to complete Deus Ex Human Revolution, doing all the side quests I could find. Granted that I didn't read every single email and pocket secretary, so I may be missing out on a lot of background on all the mooks whose necks I've been snapping.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10135
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Jul 29, 2013 6:59 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:That's a good point. I had forgotten that she had in fact asked for much less than she got. I suppose that's a tricky question in fundraisers - what to do with excess money. There's only so much you can spend on a single project, and you can't really expect someone to dedicate the rest of his life to similar projects just because you gave him money. Just keeping the money doesn't seem entirely fair either though. I have no idea what a good solution is. This is hardly the first fundraiser ever though. Is there some kind of general etiquette regarding this?


Stretch goals are common, but not a requirement. In pure charity fundraisers, there is the expectation that additional funding over the goal will still be used for the charitable purpose. However, kickstarter does not limit itself to charities. Some degree of profit is entirely to be expected. It's generally sort of expected that additional funding will be used in a manner similar to the original funding, so producing perhaps a bonus segment or two, or increasing the quality of the stuff produced would be pretty normal, along with updates to your backers about same. It's pretty much just an extension of the usual custom of repaying generosity in kind.

However, I wouldn't get overly bent out of shape if it's merely a deviation from custom. We have bigger Kickstarter issues at hand, like folks outright tanking, delivering neither money nor product back to the backers.

User avatar
bluebambue
An der schönen blauen Donau
Posts: 900
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 5:14 am UTC

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby bluebambue » Tue Jul 30, 2013 5:57 am UTC

Kickstarter doesn't allow charities at all
"Kickstarter cannot be used to raise money for causes, whether it's the Red Cross or a scholarship, or for "fund my life" projects, like tuition or bills."
http://www.kickstarter.com/help/guidelines

So unless the project can be made better with more money, there isn't really much you can do with it.

User avatar
cerbie
Posts: 934
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 5:14 am UTC
Location: USA

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby cerbie » Tue Jul 30, 2013 5:29 pm UTC

I can't help but be amused by imagining such a critique of someone talking about why you don't make female dwarves part of your militia (FYI, because they will give birth in danger rooms and other dangerous places, then the baby dies, and everyone is saddened)...

In context, I do think there's a real problem with not crediting the sources, but not a problem with using the material. Sifting through others' material, which has already typically been organized, and often shortened to the important bits, will take much less time than playing through everything she wants to talk about, recording all her own footage, and then going back over it all for the snippets. I'm only near the end of the first video, and it probably would have taken a hundred hours or so, by itself, acquiring, playing, organizing the recordings, snipping bits out, and so on and so forth. The use itself seems pretty fair, to me, at least. In addition, if one hasn't been playing reflex-oriented games for years, already (I know nothing about this woman), it could end up even harder, with the general frustration and sensory processing overload obfuscating anything she might find to critique about the content, and/or making it take longer to get to important spots where relevant dialogue and cutscenes exist.

Playing a representative sampling, so as to not be misrepresenting the content or its creators, based on unfounded stereotypes, yet using effectively stock footage to put together the videos, would be quite fair, IMO. It would also take enough time to be worthy of some compensation as a documentary maker or other commentator, not already doing that as a regular hobby. It's not your average everyday situation, certainly, but it makes enough sense.

Did donors know that they were giving added money, far beyond what was requested? It seems like it, and if so, that should be fine, as long as she doesn't go spend it all on recreational drugs or something. Once donations get to a point, they are certainly going to not be able to be used for the project at hand, when it comes to a project that isn't funding production of things. Hopefully the money will be mostly used for something with more substance (can we all agree that sexism in video games has been pervasive, and rarely subtle, even if not intentional?), but clearly the people giving it figured it was worth giving.
DSenette: (...) on the whole, even a trained killer cow is kind of stupid.

Heisenberg
Posts: 3789
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Uncertain

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby Heisenberg » Tue Jul 30, 2013 5:49 pm UTC

cerbie wrote:I can't help but be amused by imagining such a critique of someone talking about why you don't make female dwarves part of your militia (FYI, because they will give birth in danger rooms and other dangerous places, then the baby dies, and everyone is saddened)...

Is this supposed to be a tongue-in-cheek commentary on the stupidity of the game creators, or do you really think that "battlefields full of dead babies" is a legitimate reason to ban women from serving in the armed forces?

nitePhyyre
Posts: 1280
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:31 am UTC

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby nitePhyyre » Tue Jul 30, 2013 6:18 pm UTC

I think it's a dwarf fortress joke.
sourmìlk wrote:Monopolies are not when a single company controls the market for a single product.

You don't become great by trying to be great. You become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard you become great in the process.

Heisenberg
Posts: 3789
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Uncertain

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby Heisenberg » Tue Jul 30, 2013 7:06 pm UTC

Oh. My apologies. Carry on.

User avatar
ConMan
Shepherd's Pie?
Posts: 1631
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 11:56 am UTC
Location: Beacon Alpha

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby ConMan » Tue Jul 30, 2013 11:06 pm UTC

cerbie wrote:Did donors know that they were giving added money, far beyond what was requested? It seems like it, and if so, that should be fine, as long as she doesn't go spend it all on recreational drugs or something.

Yep. Kickstarter shows the current amount of donations, the requested amount, and the time left for the campaign. It was abundantly clear that this campaign went above and beyond its original goal, and I'm pretty sure she added in "stretch goals" that showed a little of what she would do with extra money. That said, I would be rather surprised if most of the people making the biggest fuss of this had contributed anything to the campaign, and would be much less surprised to find that some of them were in the same group that harrassed her during it.
pollywog wrote:
Wikihow wrote:* Smile a lot! Give a gay girl a knowing "Hey, I'm a lesbian too!" smile.
I want to learn this smile, perfect it, and then go around smiling at lesbians and freaking them out.

JainBug
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2013 11:03 pm UTC

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby JainBug » Thu Aug 01, 2013 2:56 am UTC

One thing that stood out to me is that she used the word "misogynist" at at least one point in her videos. A misogynist is a person who HATES women. The term is overused by the feminists, and seems to be directed at people who don't like them; they should instead use the term "anti-feminist".

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby Lucrece » Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:18 am UTC

JainBug wrote:One thing that stood out to me is that she used the word "misogynist" at at least one point in her videos. A misogynist is a person who HATES women. The term is overused by the feminists, and seems to be directed at people who don't like them; they should instead use the term "anti-feminist".


Nope, you're just using a narrow definition of the term. Pretty much like white racist says they're not racist because they're not skinheads with offensive tattoos screaming at white people.

A misanthropist isn't someone that necessarily hates humanity. Hermits can be deemed misanthropists, but not because they just hate. Dislike or discomfort is enough.

If your marketing strategies involve objectifying women to an offensive degree and constantly depicting them as pitiful idiots/incompetent in most of your games, you are misogynistic.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

User avatar
krogoth
Posts: 411
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Australia

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby krogoth » Thu Aug 01, 2013 6:00 am UTC

Lucrece wrote:If your marketing strategies involve objectifying women to an offensive degree and constantly depicting them as pitiful idiots/incompetent in most of your games, you are misogynistic.


I find the real problem is that she is offended by everything, both sides of the coin, she's complaining that characters are characters, oh no they are well built and too strong and manly, oh no they are too effeminate and fragile. I won't watch her videos after the first time just because I don't want her to have the extra views.

I've watched one of her videos fully, I felt it was biased, it didn't try to show any characters or styles she supported, it lacked knowledge of the subject matter.
R3sistance - I don't care at all for the ignorance spreading done by many and to the best of my abilities I try to correct this as much as I can, but I know and understand that even I can not be completely honest, truthful and factual all of the time.

Derek
Posts: 2148
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:15 am UTC

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby Derek » Thu Aug 01, 2013 6:05 am UTC

krogoth wrote:
Lucrece wrote:If your marketing strategies involve objectifying women to an offensive degree and constantly depicting them as pitiful idiots/incompetent in most of your games, you are misogynistic.


I find the real problem is that she is offended by everything, both sides of the coin, she's complaining that characters are characters, oh no they are well built and too strong and manly, oh no they are too effeminate and fragile. I won't watch her videos after the first time just because I don't want her to have the extra views.

I've watched one of her videos fully, I felt it was biased, it didn't try to show any characters or styles she supported, it lacked knowledge of the subject matter.

I believe the third video is supposed to show positive examples. I agree that a lot of her analysis so far seems double sided, and I'm looking forward to seeing what she considers to be positive portrayals. No idea when it comes out though.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby Lucrece » Thu Aug 01, 2013 6:32 am UTC

krogoth wrote:
Lucrece wrote:If your marketing strategies involve objectifying women to an offensive degree and constantly depicting them as pitiful idiots/incompetent in most of your games, you are misogynistic.


I find the real problem is that she is offended by everything, both sides of the coin, she's complaining that characters are characters, oh no they are well built and too strong and manly, oh no they are too effeminate and fragile. I won't watch her videos after the first time just because I don't want her to have the extra views.

I've watched one of her videos fully, I felt it was biased, it didn't try to show any characters or styles she supported, it lacked knowledge of the subject matter.



Point me to where she has complained about a male character being effeminate and fragile.

And when she complains about females being strong, it's because that strength is defined by the female doing masculine things, namely achieving things through aggression instead of cooperation.

I think people really are looking for excuses to dislike her. There is nuance to her complaint about the characters being too manly. The problem is the definition of manliness. She doesn't dislike that male characters may be confident or take initiative. She complains when being a sociopath is a sign of manliness. When your conflict resolution boils down to "beat this guy up or harm him in any other way, psychologically or in resources".

Just as she doesn't complain that female characters may be weak. They may have self-doubt and flaws. They can even be cowardly. The problem is when those flaws are introduced merely as a vehicle to show the male character's compensation for it.

The way masculinity is built in society is highly toxic. And femininity is being built to enable that toxic conception of masculinity.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10135
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Aug 01, 2013 11:57 am UTC

JainBug wrote:One thing that stood out to me is that she used the word "misogynist" at at least one point in her videos. A misogynist is a person who HATES women. The term is overused by the feminists, and seems to be directed at people who don't like them; they should instead use the term "anti-feminist".


I suspect part of the problem here is the gender biasing of the terms. Feminist stands for equality, yet the word is also definitely female in origin. There's not really a male-originating counterpart. I think a lot of people object to the terminology, rather than the ideas for which it stands. And yes, there is a lot of irony there, considering the many other terms that are male in origin.

Lucrece wrote:
JainBug wrote:One thing that stood out to me is that she used the word "misogynist" at at least one point in her videos. A misogynist is a person who HATES women. The term is overused by the feminists, and seems to be directed at people who don't like them; they should instead use the term "anti-feminist".


Nope, you're just using a narrow definition of the term. Pretty much like white racist says they're not racist because they're not skinheads with offensive tattoos screaming at white people.

A misanthropist isn't someone that necessarily hates humanity. Hermits can be deemed misanthropists, but not because they just hate. Dislike or discomfort is enough.

If your marketing strategies involve objectifying women to an offensive degree and constantly depicting them as pitiful idiots/incompetent in most of your games, you are misogynistic.



Sorry, misogynist literally does mean woman hater. That's the roots of the word. It isn't a redefinition in the way racism is, that's it's proper definition, that's the root of the word, that's what it means and has meant. It's not a narrow definition, it is the proper definition.

Yes, it is quite possible to do offensive things without being a misogynist. Hell, it's even possible to put in place a policy that furthers racism without being a racist. Unintended consequences of actions is totally a thing.

However, one use of a word in not *quite* the right way isn't really that big of a deal. If that's your standard for outrage, the internet will be a rough place to visit.

As for answers being violent in video games, well, yeah. If you grab an action game, that's gonna be the result, just like if you watch an action movie. The answers are going to come in the form of "how can we solve this complex problem with bullets", because that's what the genre is. It's like complaining about the unrealism of people breaking out into song in a musical.

User avatar
cerbie
Posts: 934
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 5:14 am UTC
Location: USA

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby cerbie » Thu Aug 01, 2013 4:21 pm UTC

nitePhyyre wrote:I think it's a dwarf fortress joke.
Yes. Some people work to make their dwarfs apathetic to the point that their infants can be armor for them, so it's not a problem, but I can't go that far, even though it's just ASCII.

krogoth wrote:I've watched one of her videos fully, I felt it was biased, it didn't try to show any characters or styles she supported, it lacked knowledge of the subject matter.
I didn't feel like going through more of them, because that first one was mostly tired same-old, but it would be bordering on silly to not make mention of the likes of several Square heroines, most of which have not been male-like characters in female guises, Jade from BG&E (my fav VG heroine, BTW, and an awesome game, if you've not played it), and the rebooted Lara Croft, just off the top of my head.

But, that still makes for quite a minority, today (I don't disagree w/ her general sentiment, just the value in watching long videos about it). As well, the general way that would be done would be after several episodes of negatives, for predictable suspense, to help keep an interested audience watching the next ones. Neg, neg, neg, neg, POSITIVE CHARACTERS COUNTERPOINT EPISODE, neg, neg, neg...
DSenette: (...) on the whole, even a trained killer cow is kind of stupid.

Heisenberg
Posts: 3789
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Uncertain

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby Heisenberg » Thu Aug 01, 2013 4:34 pm UTC

JainBug wrote:One thing that stood out to me is that she used the word "misogynist" at at least one point in her videos. A misogynist is a person who HATES women. The term is overused by the feminists, and seems to be directed at people who don't like them; they should instead use the term "anti-feminist".

So... I just watched the video and she uses "misogynist" to describe the part in GTA III where the protagonist saves the damsel, listens to her talk about hair and nails, and then shoots her. He kills a woman because he is annoyed by her woman-talk. That's an entirely appropriate use of the word "misogynist."

User avatar
eSOANEM
:D
Posts: 3596
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:39 pm UTC
Location: Grantabrycge

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby eSOANEM » Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:07 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
Sorry, misogynist literally does mean woman hater. That's the roots of the word. It isn't a redefinition in the way racism is, that's it's proper definition, that's the root of the word, that's what it means and has meant. It's not a narrow definition, it is the proper definition.


Did you miss the part where meanings evolve and words meanings aren't determined by their etymology?

When I'm sarcastic, I'm not tearing your flesh am I? When I say very I don't mean "truly" do I?

Words are not their etymologies, meaning changes, get over it. Misogynist does not mean woman hater any more.
my pronouns are they

Magnanimous wrote:(fuck the macrons)

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10135
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:35 pm UTC

eSOANEM wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:
Sorry, misogynist literally does mean woman hater. That's the roots of the word. It isn't a redefinition in the way racism is, that's it's proper definition, that's the root of the word, that's what it means and has meant. It's not a narrow definition, it is the proper definition.


Did you miss the part where meanings evolve and words meanings aren't determined by their etymology?

When I'm sarcastic, I'm not tearing your flesh am I? When I say very I don't mean "truly" do I?

Words are not their etymologies, meaning changes, get over it. Misogynist does not mean woman hater any more.


It is also it's current definition. This isn't "the word changed", this is using a word more loosely than it is defined.

Queue
Posts: 56
Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 4:32 pm UTC

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby Queue » Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:51 pm UTC

Lucrece wrote:And when she complains about females being strong, it's because that strength is defined by the female doing masculine things, namely achieving things through aggression instead of cooperation.

Question: Let's say you're marketing to a crowd that enjoys the catharsis of fantasy violence. The game's antagonist is a horde of screaming space-zombies with a shark for one arm and a machine gun that shoots smaller sharks for the other. How would you create a positive female character, and how would she solve that problem?

I would argue that the simplest dividing line between a positive character and negative doesn't really have anything to do with strength and violence, but rather with whether the character was ever given choice (or written as though they had choice).

A positive character is one who has made the choice to be prudish or slutty, violent or pacifistic, a victim or a messiah, for their own individual reasons, and not 'because gender'. And certainly not because they have no function in the story other than to be a symbol, goalpost or obstacle.

User avatar
eSOANEM
:D
Posts: 3596
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:39 pm UTC
Location: Grantabrycge

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby eSOANEM » Thu Aug 01, 2013 6:04 pm UTC

It is also a current definition.

It also has another definition (to do with prejudice against women)[1]. The same is true of similar terms such as homophobe.
my pronouns are they

Magnanimous wrote:(fuck the macrons)

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 25789
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Aug 01, 2013 6:38 pm UTC

The definition of a word is what it's used to mean. If "misogynist" is currently used (and understood) to mean something other than a person who consciously hates women, then that is a current definition.

You can complain about words changing over time on a number of different grounds, but "that isn't the definition" isn't a valid one.

(And as mentioned it's pretty moot in any case, since I think it applies even in the narrowest possible sense to murdering a woman because she's talking about feminine things.)
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
yurell
Posts: 2924
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:19 am UTC
Location: Australia!

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby yurell » Fri Aug 02, 2013 5:58 am UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Sorry, misogynist literally does mean woman hater. That's the roots of the word. It isn't a redefinition in the way racism is, that's it's proper definition, that's the root of the word, that's what it means and has meant. It's not a narrow definition, it is the proper definition.


Dictionaries are descriptive, not prescriptive, and words mean what they are used to mean, not what the Latin (or other ancient language) roots literally mean. 'Misogyny' has not been used to exclusively mean 'the irrational hatred of women' for a very long time (at least the '90's) in feminist literature (that is, the people who actually study the field where the word is applicable), nor for the past decade in broader English.

As an aside, I love the hypothetical game in the latest Tropes vs Women in Video Games, and would happily play it.
cemper93 wrote:Dude, I just presented an elaborate multiple fraction in Comic Sans. Who are you to question me?


Pronouns: Feminine pronouns please!

Nordic Einar
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:21 am UTC

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby Nordic Einar » Fri Aug 02, 2013 6:47 am UTC

cerbie wrote:
krogoth wrote:I've watched one of her videos fully, I felt it was biased, it didn't try to show any characters or styles she supported, it lacked knowledge of the subject matter.
I didn't feel like going through more of them, because that first one was mostly tired same-old, but it would be bordering on silly to not make mention of the likes of several Square heroines, most of which have not been male-like characters in female guises, Jade from BG&E (my fav VG heroine, BTW, and an awesome game, if you've not played it), and the rebooted Lara Croft, just off the top of my head.


Would that be the same rebooted Lara Croft that uses rape as "character building"? Because I'm not sure that supports the argument of positive portrayals of women in gaming.

Heisenberg wrote:
JainBug wrote:One thing that stood out to me is that she used the word "misogynist" at at least one point in her videos. A misogynist is a person who HATES women. The term is overused by the feminists, and seems to be directed at people who don't like them; they should instead use the term "anti-feminist".

So... I just watched the video and she uses "misogynist" to describe the part in GTA III where the protagonist saves the damsel, listens to her talk about hair and nails, and then shoots her. He kills a woman because he is annoyed by her woman-talk. That's an entirely appropriate use of the word "misogynist."


Yeah... kind of telling that we're arguing the evolution of the word misogyny here when the example she cites uses the stricter, more archaic definition pretty accurately.

User avatar
cerbie
Posts: 934
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 5:14 am UTC
Location: USA

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby cerbie » Fri Aug 02, 2013 11:15 am UTC

Nordic Einar wrote:
cerbie wrote:
krogoth wrote:I've watched one of her videos fully, I felt it was biased, it didn't try to show any characters or styles she supported, it lacked knowledge of the subject matter.
I didn't feel like going through more of them, because that first one was mostly tired same-old, but it would be bordering on silly to not make mention of the likes of several Square heroines, most of which have not been male-like characters in female guises, Jade from BG&E (my fav VG heroine, BTW, and an awesome game, if you've not played it), and the rebooted Lara Croft, just off the top of my head.

Would that be the same rebooted Lara Croft that uses rape as "character building"?
No. This would be the game where there is a clear threat of rape in an early cutscene, after which you have to escape and kill them all. More backdrop building than character building, and I can't say I would be impressed with Basically Decent savage pirate type bad guys.

You could definitely level some character-building issues at it, but more along the lines of:
"Oh no, I just killed someone! How do I deal with this?"
"I know, I'll kill another 50 of them before the sun sets! La la la la..."
Good game (3/5?), but if trying to fit events into a plot, with characters, and some degree of a meaningful script, they did kind of miss the mark, as far as nothing changing character-wise after the first few minutes.
DSenette: (...) on the whole, even a trained killer cow is kind of stupid.

User avatar
Simius
Posts: 89
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 2:17 pm UTC
Location: Vancouver

Re: Anita Sarkeesian used footage from "Let's Play" videos

Postby Simius » Sat Aug 03, 2013 5:01 pm UTC

Derek wrote:
krogoth wrote:
Lucrece wrote:If your marketing strategies involve objectifying women to an offensive degree and constantly depicting them as pitiful idiots/incompetent in most of your games, you are misogynistic.


I find the real problem is that she is offended by everything, both sides of the coin, she's complaining that characters are characters, oh no they are well built and too strong and manly, oh no they are too effeminate and fragile. I won't watch her videos after the first time just because I don't want her to have the extra views.

I've watched one of her videos fully, I felt it was biased, it didn't try to show any characters or styles she supported, it lacked knowledge of the subject matter.

I believe the third video is supposed to show positive examples. I agree that a lot of her analysis so far seems double sided, and I'm looking forward to seeing what she considers to be positive portrayals. No idea when it comes out though.


The third video is up now.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dauric, Mutex and 25 guests