The short story is that Anita Sarkeesian of Feminist Frequency has started a Kickstarter to explore the stereotypes of females in video games. Or well, why not just hear it in her words?

I love playing video games but I’m regularly disappointed in the limited and limiting ways women are represented. This video project will explore, analyze and deconstruct some of the most common tropes and stereotypes of female characters in games. The series will highlight the larger recurring patterns and conventions used within the gaming industry rather than just focusing on the worst offenders. I’m going to need your help to make it happen!

The longer story is that because she is a self-proclaimed "feminist" (what this means in her case I'm really not sure, since everyone interprets this label differently when applying it to themselves) that anything she does somehow automatically becomes super controversial, and she has received rape threats and death threats and attempts to shut down this project from (primarily) male gamers. Because obviously if you disagree with feminism the way to get your point across is to tell a women she needs to be raped and murdered. (That was sarcasm, in case you missed it. This is not the correct way to express disagreement. At all.)

Personally I think that, all fears of succumbing to the feminist agenda aside (also sarcasm), projects like hers are necessary for the video game industry to truly mature. Gamers seem to love talking about the word "mature" a lot, so why do we rebel against actual maturity so much? I think that it's a good thing that she is sticking to her project, all threats aside. And whatever the case, it is ridiculous that people are fighting so hard to shut her up. Why not let her say what she has to say and if, after actually hearing it, you disagree with it, you are well within your rights to say something.

What do you guys think?

PS. As of this writing she has brought in $126,768 of her $6,000 Kickstarter goal. So things aren't completely dire. But this doesn't negate the abuse she has had to (and most likely will continue to) sustain just to get this project moving.

As of today this thread will be locked. What originally was meant to be a thread discussing the soon-to-be controversial Anita videos about female tropes in Video Games grew into something much more. We at Negative World absolutely love a good conversation and we will always encourage mature and respectful conversation. That said, the thread has had it's moments of polarization to the extreme in the past and recently. While at the moment I write this, the thread is rather calm,.. there has been a joint decision by the moderators of this site to close this particular thread down. The thread strayed way outside of the original bounds of it's intent. We have a different idea of how to frame this delicate and polarizing topic at Negative World.

For future installments of Anita's series we will either have a mod create a new official thread for it (as well as posting links to previous episodes) or we will use our already established Youtube Video thread. The latter could have easily been the original home for this thread if it wanted to. Discussion can continue as normal in the future thread but we ask to keep in mind that the topic should relate to Anita's videos and her message. Hear, analyze, and discuss that. This new location for this discussion will be established with the release of her next video. Please find patience till then.

Thank you from all of us at Negative World for understanding. ~ Negative World Moderation

URL to share (right click and copy)

@Zero

I'm saying you were less inclined to side with Paula Deen because she doesn't fit your personal Attractive Schematic.

Where, on the other hand, you find Anita incredibly attractive, and you agree with her constantly.
(BTW, Anita, how's that 3rd video coming? Milk milk milk milk milk.. Just freakin' finish it!)

Posted by

Mr_Mustache

on: 07/10/13, 00:59

@Mr_Mustache

...Correct me if I'm wrong, but Zero is agreeing/disagreeing people based on their viewpoints, nothing more.

I think you're grasping at straws on this one.

Posted by

Shadowlink

on: 07/10/13, 01:01

@Mr_Mustache

Part 2 was up on May 28th. Part 1 was up on March 7th. EGAD.

With the same timespan, we're looking at ~AUGUST 20TH for her next drop. Criminy.

@Shadowlink

Thats what he says/thinks. People are just more inclined to agree with folks they find attractive. Human nature.

Posted by

Mr_Mustache

on: 07/10/13, 01:07

@Shadowlink

I don't think so. It can't be coincidence that Zero agrees with me so often and that I'm one of the most attractive people, like.... evar!

Posted by

nacthenud

on: 07/10/13, 01:07

Mr_Mustache said:

Thats what he says/thinks. People are just more inclined to agree with folks they find attractive. Human nature.

Agreed. Pretty sure studies have been done as well. It may not feel "nice" that this is the case, but it is the case.

Doesn't mean you can't agree with an ugly gargoyle, of course. Heck, I just agreed with Mr. Mustache! HO HO! ZING! POW!

Posted by

-JKR-

on: 07/10/13, 01:12

@Mr_Mustache

But you don't know that's the case here. You're just assuming to make a point.


Isn't it a little insulting to tell someone 'Oh you don't REALLY agree with what that person is saying, you just find them attractive', or 'You only disagree with that person because she's a troll'.? It's being completely dismissive of their opinions and insinuating that they can't think for themselves.

Posted by

Shadowlink

on: 07/10/13, 01:22

@Shadowlink

If you want to battle science, be my guest.

Posted by

Mr_Mustache

on: 07/10/13, 01:23

@Mr_Mustache

I'm not battling science. I'm battling your interpretation of it's effects.

Posted by

Shadowlink

on: 07/10/13, 01:38

Yeah, that's a very, very iffy interpretation of facts here bro.

Weaksauce.

Also, science doesn't say "everyone does this all the time", it says "these are trends we can point to on a larger scale". So you can't fall back on "if you disagree with me you disagree with science" here because you are completely misapplying science.

Also, it's only marginally science. It's more sociology.

Posted by

Zero

on: 07/10/13, 01:50

Edited:

07/10/13, 01:51

@Zero

"Science of Attraction" sounded familiar, so I looked it up. You should do the same.

"Larger scale;" hasn't that been your thing the whole time? Now Anecdotal, personal experiences are king when it doesn't suit you? What gives?

Posted by

Mr_Mustache

on: 07/10/13, 01:57

Yes, anecdotal experiences are king when you are talking about a specific individual, provided those anecdotal experiences are involving that specific individual, and not about someone else. The best way to know what Zero would do in any given situation is look at the life and experiences of Zero, of course. Saying 78.3% of men would do X might let you make a semi-accurate prediction, but that is all that it would be, a prediction, and you would only have the accuracy of the general prediction... 78.3%, in this case. Knowing him personally will let you make more accurate predictions. For instance, what is the chance that the average guy would go to a strip club with Mustache? Let's say 50%. Now, what is the chance that Zero would? Approximately 0%. Not exactly 0%, but close enough. If you want to bet money on it, go with the anecdotal first-hand knowledge here, and not the general trends.

This is what happens when you deal with someone who is, apparently, some kind of an iconoclastic hipster.

General trends cannot be used to say anything concrete about a specific individual any more than individual anecdotes can be used to say anything specific about a general group. Broad-based data only work on groups (it's still often dangerous, but it can at least be reasonably applied to groups, for instance, you can predict that X amount of group Y will do Z based on sound, broad-based statistics), and anecdotal evidence only works on the individuals involved.

The problem with your anecdotal evidence is that you try to use it to make larger generalizations, while ignoring broad-based data. If a woman cuts you off in her car and you tell us "this woman cut me off", OF COURSE your anecdotal evidence is being applied correctly. You're 100% correct that this woman cut you off (unless you misidentified her, but that's a whole other can of worms.) Your anecdotal evidence is only being misapplied when you start talking about women drivers in general because of your anecdotal experiences.

This is not very complicated. It's sort of annoying that I have to explain such a basic concept. I feel like you're just trying to attack me from every angle now, "how can I make that Zero look like a hypocrite!", but most of the time it comes off as sort of desperate.

Posted by

Zero

on: 07/10/13, 03:17

Edited:

07/10/13, 03:27

Mr_Mustache said:

People are just more inclined to agree with folks they find attractive. Human nature.

-JKR- said:

Agreed. Pretty sure studies have been done as well. It may not feel "nice" that this is the case, but it is the case.

Doesn't mean you can't agree with an ugly gargoyle, of course.

Yup. I've actually helped conduct studies on this. Though we were looking at it concerning computer mediated communication via facebook. Used different levels of "attractive" pictures of people on fake accounts and then measured responses during a series of interactions.

Posted by

Chocobo_Rider

on: 07/10/13, 09:49

@Zero

A woman cut me off today. She then put her RIGHT hand out the window to say thanks. (What the hell is her LEFT hand doing?) This was after she pulled out of her driveway -- backwards, on a 4-lane road -- physically blocked oncoming traffic, and just sat there waiting for my lane (3 lanes from her driveway) to let up. I saw her again a few minutes later when she sped past me and, well, you know the rest.

Couldn't slow down and get in line behind two cars, I guess..

Posted by

Mr_Mustache

on: 07/10/13, 23:51

My cousin almost killed us both today because he was driving with his knees while on the phone with his friend and he almost veered into the next lane.

See, we're both correct in what happened involving individuals!

Posted by

Zero

on: 07/11/13, 01:01

@Mr_Mustache

Just out of curiosity, do you *only* get cut off by women? Or do men do it too?

Posted by

Shadowlink

on: 07/11/13, 01:01

@Zero

What an idiot. Your cousin is a dolt. Don't you guys have cell phone laws there?

@Shadowlink

When I got cut off by a man last time, it was a black dude in a pickup truck (I remember he had trees in the flatbed). I slammed on my brakes, and another black guy (with tiny child and wife) laid on the horn behind me. They followed me to my parking space and tore me a new asshole as racist as possible.

Thanks, Random Black Dude(s)!

Posted by

Mr_Mustache

on: 07/11/13, 01:12

We probably have laws against using cell phones while driving, but I see people doing it all the time. And speeding. And blowing red lights (less of that since the cameras went in though.)

Posted by

Zero

on: 07/11/13, 01:29

@Zero

Whup your cousin upside the head.

@Mr_Mustache

See, lots of people do it! Why complain about women?

Posted by

Shadowlink

on: 07/11/13, 01:36

@Shadowlink Oh, he definitely complained about these black dudes doing it when it happened. I clearly remember that.

Oddly enough he didn't think to tell us the racial background of the woman above. Probably a boring ol' white woman.

Posted by

Zero

on: 07/11/13, 01:37

Edited:

07/11/13, 01:38

@Zero

She was possibly mildly attractive.

Posted by

Shadowlink

on: 07/11/13, 01:39