You don’t have to get your panties in a bunch just because she wants a type of game to be made that doesn’t sexualize women enough for you. If you don’t like those games, don’t play them. Your favorite brands aren’t going anywhere. Mortal Kombat didn’t vanish just because another Seseme Street game got made.

To be fair, Sarkeesian is in fact asking all games to stop doing certain things. She's gone a bit farther than simply asking for diversity in games. It's a strongly activist stance, one everyone is free to like or dislike. But that still doesn't make her the harbinger of doom, destroyer of games that some people seem to fearmonger about. It doesn't make her a censor, and it's certainly not an existential threat. It's just one voice that has been blown ludicrously out of proportion, ironically mostly by the people trying to stop her.

Like why is it that game journalists fought Jack Thompson when he claimed video games contributed to real world violence and crimes, but are siding with Anita Sarkeesian when she takes the stance that video games contribute to real world misogyny and sexism.

This is a point that I haven't seen addressed, and I feel that the difference is sufficiently easy to miss that it's worth talking about. However, I'd like to preface my thoughts by pointing out that I'm a lay person in this discussion, and my thoughts may well be mistaken--I very much stand to be corrected. (I'm also a little tired, so my apologies if I don't convey my thoughts as effectively as I might like. ^^; )

That said:

While I don't know what Anita claims, the arguments that I've seen elsewhere have, I think, not been that such portrayals directly cause actions (as was claimed for violence--that violent games more-or-less directly inspire violent actions). Rather, the following two points are my impression: (I think that I had a third, but seem to have forgotten it for the moment. ^^; )

First, as I believe has been mentioned already, there's the matter of the preponderance of such games making for a medium that can be a little unwelcoming to some women.

To illustrate, consider a gender-flipped (and perhaps slightly hyperbolic) scenario: Games are largely made for and by heterosexual women. Major characters, and protagonists especially, are almost always women, of varying age and attractiveness (although there's an odd predominance of fourty-something brunettes... ;P). Men appear relatively seldom; when men do appear, they are generally portrayed either as brutish berserkers or vacuous eye-candy, and either way are far more often than not portrayed as very attractive, with well-defined (but not overly large) muscles, lean torsos, broad shoulders and flowing, well-kept hair, regardless of whether this fits with their character and setting. When men are portrayed as older than thirty or unattractive, they are more often than not villains that the player is expected to revile, or are there to evoke sympathy. A common means of providing motivation to the female main character is to have a man (who is often given little characterisation beyond "a loved-one of the lead") either captured or killed; when captured, men are more often than not shown to be effectively helpless, gnashing furiously but futilely at their cell walls, and making no active attempts to escape.

In this environment, how welcome would male players feel? I suspect that I might feel a little put off. For one thing, I might find myself thinking "why can't I just play as a guy for once?"--not because I can't identify with a female character, but just because it might be a little grating that I so very seldom get to play as a male one.

Second, there's the argument that media may affect perceptions, much as Servant of the Lord pointed out: simply put, if the majority of depictions of a specific group (in this case women) portray them in a particular manner, and especially if that portrayal supports already extant perceptions, then at least some portion of the audience may be influenced in the direction of that portrayal. If you doubt that media may affect perceptions, consider the effects of propaganda, which is, if I'm not much mistaken, this effect used intentionally.

For one thing, return to my previous gender-flipped scenario: how might such games leave men feeling? If, as a guy, your medium of choice keeps telling you that good men look like incredible hunks, and are all unstable beserkers, then presuming that you're not such a hunk, how are you likely to feel about yourself?

To me, the damsel in distress is actually a combination of two separate desires: Heroics (and recognition of said heroics), and 'winning the girl'.

And that's fair enough--but isn't it about time we expanded our uses of that trope such that the fantasy caters to people other than heterosexual men? What about having the male hero be out to "win the guy", or a female hero out to "win" either "the guy" or "the girl", etc.? At the moment the fantasy is given a rather limited scope, it seems to me.

If someone is saying "More options need to be made available to make the industry more open and inclusive, and here are ways it can be done", then that is good criticism. "This needs to STOP entirely, and nothing like this should be made again" is the beginnings of an attempt at censorship. I am very much in favour of creating a far more diverse industry with better writing, and a wider range of backgrounds for the developers themselves, but I'm also strongly opposed to any movement that shows any signs of trying to forcefully stop creation of content.

And yes, it is laughable to compare the current status of her campaign to prohibition. It is however not laughable to compare it to the beginnings of the movement that lead to prohibition. And in this modern communications age, where it is easier than ever for a small group to become highly vocal and visible, we have to be very careful as to what is allowed to simply let slide and be ignored. It is all too easy for politicians to jump on things because they think it will get them more support. (Just look at all the fun they're having down in Australia with their censorship regulations.)

As for the discussion at hand, a lot of people seem to forget that just because Anita Sarkeesian has a louder voice than most, it doesn’t mean she is the harbinger of doom to your way of (game) life.
[...]
Let her have her own set of games and let her be. You don’t have to get your panties in a bunch just because she wants a type of game to be made that doesn’t sexualize women enough for you. If you don’t like those games, don’t play them. Your favorite brands aren’t going anywhere. Mortal Kombat didn’t vanish just because another Seseme Street game got made.

That's a misconception, in my opinion. As I had stated before, the problem isn't that she can have her own opinion and can tell her opinon on the internet all day, nor is the problem that you are compelled to play "woman games".

The problem is that she is likely to get an audience that is likely to provoke an unfavourable reaction, changing the rules for everybody. That may happen on the legal level, or simply because a few major vendors fear the negative publicity. Which, at that point, you will no longer be able to avoid. No playing Grand Theft Auto (if that's what you want) because it's misogynist. How dare you even think about playing such a game.

This is not an uncommon thing, both with the soccermom type and the disturbed feminist type (who is hurting females much more than helping them). It is for that very same disturbed feminist type that we now have a law in Germany which requires companies to have half of the seats in the supervisory board and half of the positions in management to be filled with women.

What's the problem with that? I'm all for equal chances, but you shouldn't get a job position because you're a woman. Replace "woman" with "black" or "christian" or any other biological/ethnic property if you will. It is perfectly possible for a woman to get into management by being qualified and by delivering good results (I'm married to such a specimen). Yes, it isn't easy, and yes it means you have to make sacrifices, but this is not much different for a man.

What's different here is that the socialist sucker-type of woman asks for the same privilegues without having the same inconveniences and without making sacrifices. Which is an insult to every woman who has earned her position through hard work. I've seen qualified people not being hired by Church-owned hospitals because they're not catholic, which is pretty much the same thing.

Now, back to video games. I would really wish that depictions weren't often so... well you know. Only 13 year olds can laugh about Boobarella. But I don't need a Ms. Sarkeesian to take out her father issues on my freedom of choice. I can decide for myself.

Censorship due to disturbed people is a reality, it has been for years. You can't buy any kind of action movie here because they're so horribly cut that sometimes the movie doesn't even make sense any more (I'm talking about movies that I've watched uncut when I was 13-14 years old, this didn't appear to be any kind of problem at that time). Like the antagonist is suddenly "gone" for no apparent reason because it's unsuitable for you to see him falling down a cliff or being shot at close range. No explanation given, end titles, wtf? I'd really like to decide for myself what's unsuitable for me.

You usually won't find the genuine versions in any store anywhere and you have an extremely hard time buying a version that is only moderately censored (so it still kind of makes sense, at least) online. They're not only rare and about twice as expensive, they also require an age verification for every single title, which costs extra fees (in addition to already being expensive).

I'm well over 40 years old, and I've been a customer at Amazon for 19 years, so by my mere shopping history it isn't even possible that I could be underage. Besides, underage people don't get credit cards (not here anyway, maybe in the US?).

But I still need to present an ID to the delivery guy for every single DVD movie and pay a 5€ fee for this ridiculous, useless verification, only to comply with the censor Nazis youth protection. And then, I still don't get to see the real movie. It's not as bad as the other versions, but still.

The reason? Amazon doesn't want to risk it. Simple as that.

Now imagine you are ready to ship your game, and Valve/Steam doesn't want to risk it because Ms. Sarkeesian calls you a male chauvinist pig. You're out of business, and no, your customers can't choose "not to play woman games". They simply can't, as a matter of fact, play your title.

In this environment, how welcome would male players feel? I suspect that I might feel a little put off. For one thing, I might find myself thinking "why can't I just play as a guy for once?"--not because I can't identify with a female character, but just because it might be a little grating that I so very seldom get to play as a male one.

... snip ...

And that's fair enough--but isn't it about time we expanded our uses of that trope such that the fantasy caters to people other than heterosexual men? What about having the male hero be out to "win the guy", or a female hero out to "win" either "the guy" or "the girl", etc.? At the moment the fantasy is given a rather limited scope, it seems to me.

I think part of the problem is also that of who is in the industry; in the real world it is mostly men, in your gender-flipped world it would be mostly women.

Now, you have a game, you have someone who needs to write the story however writing convincingly for the opposite sex becomes a problem because it is a hard thing to do, its something you can get better at with practise and feedback (I read something recently about Terry Pratchett's female characters and how they progressed from being 'background arm candy' to more rounded characters as he got better at writing them) however that is probably something not many people in the industry really get a chance to practise all that much.

I find myself wondering what would be more annoying; playing male characters all the time or playing badly written female characters who are either written as a male fantasy or as effectively a man-with-woman-parts.
(This of course gets harder with gay and transsexual characters; what does the average writer know about them and how to write them?)

The solution is, of course, more diversity in the writing departments with everyone pitching in equally on all characters HOWEVER that is going to take time because for Reasons there aren't many women in the industry, which is something which needs to be fixed across the board.

The problem is that she is likely to get an audience that is likely to provoke an unfavourable reaction, changing the rules for everybody. That may happen on the legal level, or simply because a few major vendors fear the negative publicity. Which, at that point, you will no longer be able to avoid. No playing Grand Theft Auto (if that's what you want) because it's misogynist. How dare you even think about playing such a game.

Then you need to worry about your local politics and local dynamics of free speech laws - not what Anita Sarkeesian is saying on YouTube. And if the market simply rejects your game that breaches societal standards? Well, that's how the free market works. That's not censorship. One can make an argument that censorship via rejection on major distribution channels is a problem, but that's been the case for decades. Ringing the alarm bell now sounds hollow and opportunist. Why aren't you currently fighting for non-censorship of AO rated games?

While I am completly against censorship and like my healthy dose of "sexy" in game and other mediums (as long as it keeps a healthy distance of the four letter word the internet is allegedly for), I do agree with her that all points are very valid and completly overdone... not only in games, japanese mangas and animes also stick out as well as a lot of western comics, but games are a little bit more aggressive with it, especially in the AAA segment.

A sinlge look at the average brawler is enough to satisfy all of her points par point 1 (some of them have actually even more female characters than male ones... I wonder why )...

3 words: Dead or Alive... but even less blatant ones like Sould Calibur are not really trying to hide their fanservice too much.

On the other hand, this is a free world, and as long as its legal, targetted at a mature audience and clearly labelled as "may contain traces of political incorrectness", I think it is totally fine.

I HOPE what she is ranting about (Don't know, didn't watch her movies, my policy is to stay miles away from anything feminist, just as any other extremist viewpoints ... maybe I should make an exception for these vids) is more how many games are just giving in to such fanservice and tropes, without "tongue in cheek", or even really putting a warning on the box... I see how female gamers could be offended by every damn game they buy, the female protagonist wears a bikini, looks like a topmodel and has the character depth of a lobotomized ant.

Even the gals with a good portion of humour will find it appaling the fifth time in a row they HAVE to choose between the male characters or the "comic relief" characters. Heck, I as a guy find it appaling. Just because I might want to select the female character sometimes doesn't mean I want cleavage and silliness.

And really, how hard can it be to just put a single "cool" female character in? Like the female bouncer from SNK Art of Fighting.... I think her name was King? It was pretty clear she was a woman while wearing "manly clothing" (a suit), having short hair, and having moves like any male Thai Boxer. Even thes start and winning animations where pretty genderless and more "cool"...

Still, with only her slender figure, the facial features and a slightly higher voice pitch than the male characters it was pretty clear quickly to anyone she was meant to be a woman... no need for cleavage, shrieking high japanese girly voices or silly girly moves.

And yes, I usually play her when digging my old Capcom vs SNK games out of their dusty graves... SNK actually managed to pull off a female character with her that puts all the male characters to shame. She is just that cool...

And the fact I can hardly think of any other game where I could say that about a female protagonist, now THAT fact is the really sad part, and why I think Anita's viewpoint has some truth to it.

Before somebody mentions it: yes, King seems to be rather tomboy-ish. Which in turn might also piss off some women, as again you see an extreme (in this case a woman dressing in a male style, with not a very woman-like way of talking or moving).... but is this a bad thing?

I personally think not, because a) tomboys are NOT overdone to hell like the other extreme in games yet, b) it is kinda fitting for a female fighter. Some female martial artists might be quite girly outside of the ring, but most tend to be rather un-girly (not meant in any offensive way)... and seeing that, to my knowledge, she is meant to be a bouncer, I think her somewhat tomboy-ish character makes her even more realistic and believable.

EDIT: just wikid Kings character... no pics, but you wouldn't get fanservice anyway ;) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Art_of_Fighting_characters#King

Actually her character seems to have even more depth to it than I thought. Well, SNK knew how to create characters OUTSIDE of stereotypes for sure, no way they could fill so many brawlers with dozens of characters else.

The fact that according to the wiki article her character "hides her identity by dressing like a man" and "is at war with her sex" is slightly sad, as lots of woman in todays society dress similar (just because lots of business dress codes still expect woman to wear a skirt to their suit doesn't make it "dressing like a man" to wear pants), and lots of woman exhibit a similar tomboy-ish character, without being "at war with her sex" or any other bullshit like that.

Kinda sad to see a "cool female character" being shoehorned into a woman with a mental problem, if that wiki article really portrays the character profile as intended by SNK.

And DAMN, reading the wiki article just kept being reminded of Mai Shiranui from Fatal Fury. Now THAT character is exactly what Anita is talking about, and I found it highly irritating even as a kid how hypersexualized that woman was...

The thing about Anita is that she's a professional activist. If you don't like her, don't mention her, and she'll stop being relevant.

Even by creating this thread, you gave her a platform for her to inch her way into the spotlight more.

I haven't really followed the whole gamergate thing, but from what I just read, it seems like they've costed Gawker Media over a million $USD, so they're ok in my book. I hate Gawker for completely unrelated reasons.

Are the gamergate people all mysogynistic children who can't sleep at night because the next call of duty might have a few females? Maybe, who knows. More importantly, who cares? The Gamergate people should be able to voice their worry that the industry they love is potentially shifting against them, and the gamergatees(?) should be able keep doing whatever it is they're doing (what exactly are they doing? Nothing says clearly what's going on. Is it just gaming press owned by Gawker?).

The only thing though, is that gamergate seems to claim most of the gamergatees are professional victims... So why are they giving them attention? That seems like the worst course of action. The boycott, however, is a great idea. Speaking with your wallet says more than words ever could.

Personally, I'd be more drawn to a game with attractive females than one with ugly females. I'd also be more drawn to a game where I can play as a male character. That reason alone is probably why Anita's message has fallen flat in the industry, because I think I'm a pretty typical consumer.

There's room for both kinds of games, though. But if I was publishing a game, and I could get more sales by changing a few tri's, you can be sure I'd pressure my devs to do it.

I think part of the problem is also that of who is in the industry ...

True, I daresay, although I think that it's also in part to do with the perceptions of those people.

I don't think that it's unreasonable for change to start with the industry as it is now. Perhaps the first portrayals would not be ideal, but that's fine: as long as the writers are willing to accept critique, they may improve. As they do, and portrayals become less of-putting, we might see more women coming in to the industry, and thus more female writers.

... however that is probably something not many people in the industry really get a chance to practise all that much.

All the more reason to call for more (and especially more well-written) female characters, I feel.

... because I think I'm a pretty typical consumer.

Are you, though?

But presuming that you are, do the demographics resemble you in this because those are the people that are inclined to buy games, or because those are the people that are least put-off by the current state of gaming, thus producing a feedback loop: People who are fine with such games buy them, while fewer others do. Thus, when a publisher examines their audience, they see people who like such games, and so keep making them.

Indeed, might greater diversity not produce larger audiences, and thus, potentially, more money for the publishers?