I was emailed a Kotaku article yesterday. Apparently, Anita Sarkeesian has went from just critiquing games to trying to make game devs change them to how she thinks they should be done. The author of the article paraphrased the list:

1. Avoid the Smurfette principle (don't have just one female character in an ensemble cast, let alone one whose personality is more or less "girl" or "woman.")
2. "Lingerie is not armor" (Dress female characters as something other than sex objects.)
3. Have female characters of various body types
4. Don't over-emphasize female characters' rear ends, not any more than you would the average male character's.
5. Include more female characters of color.
6. Animate female characters to move the way normal women, soldiers or athletes would move.
7. Record female character voiceover so that pain sounds painful, not orgasmic
8. Include female enemies, but don't sexualize those enemies

I don't mind most of her message, and agree with a lot of it. There could be a lot more diversity.

But I strongly disagree with some parts of her message. While she can enjoy what she wants, she needs to stay away from my fantasy time.

Sadly so often the message is not that they want to add to the ecosystem of entertainment; instead the message is sometimes that they want to burn the books they find impure.

So far as this goes, I welcome her and hope she finds a measure of success.

Let her make what she wants.

I'm glad she'll be working on a game. She can make a game that fits whatever demographics she wants.

Then let her discover one facet of reality her speeches tend to ignore: Entertainment is fantasy.

Now here's the thing: different people enjoy different fantasy entertainment. And that's okay.

In these fantasies, I generally want a hero who can do heroic things. It can be James Bond, where he can drive through the city at breakneck speeds causing events that in the real world would have a pricetag of millions of dollars in damage and likely have bystanders in the hospital, all with impunity. Along the way, James Bond gets the girl, usually multiple girls. That's part of the fantasy. It can be like Ellen Ripley (of Aliens) who in a survival/horror series can taken on an army with a surprising arsenal of weapons considering the nature of the ship. I want Jason Bourne to barely escape with his life while killing off the other assassins. I want to watch Vin Diesel drive fancy cars in ways that are totally illegal yet beautiful to watch.

My wife, my daughters, and most of the females I know tend to prefer social entertainment. Movies about people engaging in social struggles, social drama, social conflict, romance, and so on. They'll still get together and watch movies like Pride and Prejudice, Jane Eyre, and modern retelling of Cinderella. The characters interact through dialogue, fight with witty dialogue, and share meaningful glances. The romantic sexy scenes show the man in a suit at a dance socially engineering his way as a powerful social juggernaut. The women are in a social battle to capture him, the antagonist fires off a deadly glare, and the protagonist avoids it with a clever social maneuver. In the end, the woman gets her man.

My male friends and myself, most tend to prefer action, with some suspense and man-style sexy shots thrown in. The hero takes discovers a path, grows into maturity, charge of the action, overcomes deadly challenges, faces some sort if final serious temptation to evil, defeats the enemy, and gets the girl.

Some people want their entertainment to be ultra-violent horror games, they'll watch horror movies and play Doom. Some people want their entertainment to be action/adventure, they'll watch action/adventures and play an RPG. Some people want their games to be social events, they'll watch romantic comedies and play The Sims. Some people want their entertainment to be building and crafting, they'll watch historical fiction and play Minecraft.

Plus, the world has just discovered women want porn in the form of 50 Shades of Grey, so expect that to hit the games market soon. God help us all if that becomes a social norm, little girls graduating from Minecraft to 50 Shades games.

If she wants to make a game where the entertainment is something else, more power to her. She can constructively add to the ecosystem.

Avoid the Smurfette principle (don't have just one female character in an ensemble cast, let alone one whose personality is more or less "girl" or "woman.")

Very reasonable.

"Lingerie is not armor" (Dress female characters as something other than sex objects.)

Very reasonable.

Have female characters of various body types

Fair enough.

Don't over-emphasize female characters' rear ends, not any more than you would the average male character's.

Now GoW might have Kratos butt covered but have anybody seen other games? Planetside 2 has fucking great butts for both genders, in MGS both Meryl AND Solid Snake butts are legendary. You say no emphasis on butts? I say emphasis on butts for everybody! Hell, its the single thing we can put emphasis on both genders since while not everybody has breasts, vaginas or penises, everybody has a butt.

Include more female characters of color.

Very reasonable.

Animate female characters to move the way normal women, soldiers or athletes would move.

Use same mocap animations for everybody, got it.

Record female character voiceover so that pain sounds painful, not orgasmic

Now that's spot on.

Include female enemies, but don't sexualize those enemies

Eh, I'm on the fence of this one. I'd need more specifics.

I mean, if you can have characters (good or bad) that happen to be women, you should be able to have characters (good or bad) that happen to be women and hot. Say, in Final Fantasy games usually everybody is good looking. I don't see why if a good looking characters is a woman and an "enemy" it should be an issue. There is a thin line between sexualizing something and just stating "this person is good looking" by various means. And for some characters looks might be important (say, successful good looking character driven mad by power trope), going to the trope of "ugly equals evil" isn't a solution either.

What I would agree on if we were specifically talking about situations that look BDSMish (actually, emphasis the sadism part), say Prince of Persia Warrior Within various female enemies. That one definitively is differently represented than for male enemies. I guess you could go BDSMish all the way for everybody if that's your thing though.

Now I'm pretty sure Sarkeesian is a bit more extreme than what that list might imply (ie, if you do all of that and also have a single long legged big breasted woman she'd point it out anyway), but I'd say that's the unimportant bit of her message, we surely take the important bits though.

I wasn't worried about it too much until Intel gave her $300M and a larger platform to speak from.

Where is this stated? Do you have an article? I find it surprising that Intel is giving her $300M, while Intel itself hasn't been making games. What does Intel have to do with this? What does Intel want from this?

I sense that the video game industry has becoming more and more politicized. Big co pulling strings. Ambassadors and public figures like Sarkessian getting lump sum money to give talks and represent some ideas.

What is going on here?

edit:

Found one here: http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/01/09/intels-300m-diversity-drive-is-discriminatory-and-wrongheaded/

'Forcing' an opinion is silly. Keep making games the way you want them. I want 'diversity' in opinions and the kind of games I am playing.

I view most of these items as a form of censorship to be honest.

Good for you.

Most people think that if you can't tell the difference between censorship and criticism then you're a fucking moron.

My opinion is that honestly

WHOA WHOA WHOA! STOP. STOP!

STOP CENSORING ME!

HOW DARE YOU HAVE OPINIONS AND CRITIQUE OTHERS!
CENSORRRRSHIIIIPPPPP!!!! CALL THE PO PO!!!! GET THE UN IN HERE, I'M BEING OPPRESSED BY OPINIONS!

Why are you feeling so incredibly threatened by a critic having opinions?

Is it because she's a she? C'mon, you can tell us.

You know she's not actually kicking in doors and censoring games, right?

You know that if you don't want to be influenced by her opinion, you can just, you know, not go to her talks...

I wasn't worried about it too much until Intel gave her $300M and a larger platform to speak from.

Where is this stated? Do you have an article? I find it surprising that Intel is giving her $300M, while Intel itself hasn't been making games. What does Intel have to do with this? What does Intel want from this?

http://www.reaxxion.com/3912/intel-proudly-announces-diversity-initiative-with-anita-sarkeesians-feminist-frequency

Basically, she has taken the "48% of gamers are female" statistic and started a campaign to force developers to make their games for women (ignoring the fact that the largest percent of that 48 is casual gamers who play Bejeweled and Farmville). This is just her latest list, she has been calling for game developers to stop using Damsel In Distress (she says trope, but I call it a plot device) completely. Her arguments, while flimsy, are that women being sexualized and objectified in games will result in women being sexualized and objectified in real life. That is the premise behind her call for these changes. I've always thought games emulated society, but she argues society emulates games. Her arguments have been compared to that of Jack Thompson when he went on his crusade to blame games for violent crimes. The part that scares me is that a lot of people are listening to her and taking it serious.

Making matters worse is she is getting air time from news outlets where she gets to spin a tale her way to garner sympathy and more followers for her campaign:

Basically, she has taken the "48% of gamers are female" statistic and started a campaign to force developers...

No, there's your incredibly threatened emotional language again. Giving critique does not equal using force.

You're going to have to start at the beginning and explain to us (or a shrink -- there's surely some deep seated issues under that kind of huge confabulation) why critique is equal to censorship, and why opinion is equal to force.

Stop drinking the #GamerGate cool aid. It's seeping out of your pores here.

ignoring the fact that the largest percent of that 48 is casual gamers who play Bejeweled and Farmville

And you just revealed your own sexist bias: "girls only play casual games". Ok, sure. You got sources for that, or just prejudice?

Her arguments, while flimsy, are that women being sexualized and objectified in games will result in women being sexualized and objectified in real life. That is the premise behind her call for these changes. I've always thought games emulated society, but she argues society emulates games.

Is that really her argument? Or is it more along the lines of: we have the power to choose whether we're going to continue to create objectified sexist tripe, or maybe to be a bit progressive. ...That many of us probably propagate sexism unintentionally thanks to unconscious bias, so maybe it's something we should at least think about.

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
Even if you don't agree with people like Sarkessian, it's maybe worthwhile entertaining their critique in case you learn something.

The part that scares me is that a lot of people are listening to her and taking it serious.

How can you look at the many ridiculously objectified and/or over-sexualized female characters, the many all-male games, the endless works that fail the Bechdel test, and not consider that there is at least a tiny bit of unconscious bias at work? Even ignoring preachers like Sarkeesian, how can you not give one single thought to gender issues in the wider world, in art, and in the kind of art we dedicate ourselves to?
Maybe when your daughter asks you "Daddy, why are all girl characters only wearing underpants? Where are the cool ones? How come only the boys get the good armour?" it will sink in that maybe it would be nice to treat girls as real people just sometimes.

[edit]

http://www.reaxxion.com/3912/intel-proudly-announces-diversity-initiative-with-anita-sarkeesians-feminist-frequency

You said Intel paid her $300M, but even your hateful #GG blog source contradicts your comprehension of events - it doesn't mention how much funding or involvement FF will have.

Not only that, but to paraphrase him:
* Encouraging diversity is an attack on men.
* IGDA is bad, mmkay.
* Women make terrible games.
* Kotaku writes about terrible games, claiming they're great because they're basically just Tumblr.
* Cyber bullying isn't real.
* A diverse workforce is more incompetent than an all male one.
* You should boycott Intel products because they care about diversity, even though this has absolutely nothing to do with ethics in games journalism, or whatever...

And people like this wonder why they're seen as hateful jerks...

Hodgman has covered most anything I could possibly add, but I'm always a little baffled by the level of outrage toward people such as Sarkeesian. It can't be the approach, because she's remarkably reasoned and even-tempered, all things considered. I mean, it's a rather uninteresting baseline third-wave feminist critique of video games, presented in a dry academic style. There's absolutely nothing to be upset about. It's not that people simply disagree with her, but the passion in which they seem to, that I find confusing.

It feels like a threatened response, but what I genuinely don't understand is threatened of what? What is the worst possible scenario that could come of a critique such as this? Game developers considering how they handle female representations in their game? The horror.

It's not that I agree with everything she says (likely for very different reasons than her detractors, I'm sure), but I'm genuinely baffled by the opposition and reaction to her. It just feels like a primal reaction, to avoid the uncomfortable circumstance of critically examining their own views on women.

I was referencing the ESA 2014 report that stated 48% of gamers were female and then showed casual and mobile games were the highest percents for them.

As for "forcing developers", I was also referring to a GX panel where she told the game journalists and gamers there that they had to pressure game developers into making games more inclusive and more realistic.

You have made it clear though that my concerns are unfounded.

a GX panel where she told the game journalists and gamers there that they had to pressure game developers into making games more inclusive and more realistic.

Sure, that's what she's advocating and she would encourage anyone who agrees to make their thoughts known. This still doesn't enforce anything or prevent developers from releasing anything.