MC Final Sigma

I guess it's easier to hide behind subjective appraisals than to show me why I'm wrong.

Not what I said. The imagery is clearly coded as sexual, and specifically so in this case - compare every other god/goddess kill in the series. None of these actions is particularly lurid by itself, but it makes a strong combination. And it's not a "genetic fallacy" because you can't see the obvious. Also, Cash and Change, women are more adversely affected by this sexist trope and possibly, on the whole, more acutely aware of it, but they are not the sole arbiters of what's sexist or not. Anyone can give their point of view, and it's not like we've been somehow excluding women. I don't know the gender of half these people.

I guess we should treat women differently. Seriously, though, why should we pay more attention to women? I suspect their opinions will vary as much as men's will. And if they do have a monolithic opinion, I guess that means they must agree with Anita Sarkeesian, huh? Also @Brandon: I don't think that either the achievement name or the fact that it's a woman receiving the violence is what's wrong with that clip (although many people do). Instead, I think the violence has pretty clear sexual undertones: dragging her waist-first toward him, almost mounting her, lifting her up on his shoulder caveman-style, and then penetrating her lower abdomen with a giant phallic spike. So, the violence in GoW is normally fantasy violence, but it's not usually a rape fantasy, which you may agree is crossing a line. The curb stomp didn't particularly bother me, Kratos does much worse to Helios in another game.

This is an awesome concept! If anyone needs a rapper, I'm down. In particular, I think the "Virus Battle 2" would be a great rap track, as well as Bowser's theme and the somewhat stronger boss battle theme. I also like Mallow's theme for the weather puns. Anyway, I'll do whatever, hit me up, and good luck with this! Also: 1) Do you guys have a plot worked out beyond the teaser, or would the contributors be in some ways co-authoring it? 2) Gotta work in a Luigi cameo somehow in the parade at the end, Mario RPG-style, and 3) This theme should find a way into this album: I would love to see it in a corny Monster Mash/Love Shack-style... if that makes sense... Would be happy to contribute!

I thought the golden wrench analogy was brilliant, but it's actually unnecessary because we have a real example to work with. In Super Mario Land 2, Wario steals Mario's castle (yes, that's right, his Marioland stronghold), which spurs on the action of the game. So in SML 2, the "damsel" is literally an object, and it made zero difference to the player (and, presumably, to Mario).

This is pretty bad. I mean, it's not the most violent scene in the series, but it did look at one point like he was about to mount her. Like rapist-style. And I think they were going for that for the shock value. So yeah, pretty bad. Turns out the achievement didn't refer to Kratos' violence, but I still despise that "motto."

Certainly "bros before hos" is reprehensible, particularly in connection to violence against women. As to the violence itself: this doesn't refer to the harpies, but a reviewer for the new GoW game said this about how Kratos kills a female enemy in the new game. I think it speaks to the difference between male and female violence in GoW: Review found here: http://www.polygon.com/game/god-of-war-ascension/3611 Also: Agreed! The thing is, culture does not simply reflect our ideals, it "pushes back" and acts back on its makers, generating more culture. Thus it is problematic if videogames are sexist in certain ways because they foster an environment for more sexism. Are videogames the worst problem for women right now? Of course not. But why not solve big and little problems, especially if the little ones contribute to the big ones? "Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good." EDIT: I also think that diagnosing sexism in videogames and other media is a good "gateway drug" for thinking about gender issues in general.

I never made that statement. You're not making sense. EDIT: I mean no one made that statement. I saw the "@ Tensei" What are you talking about? You're confused about what gender norms are in society? What? You quoted them in this very post. It's where I explain my argument and why I feel that way. Yeah, apparently not, hence our current debate. What I mean is there is no unambiguous point of agreement on any moral issue that every human being can assent to. This raises the problem of moral relativism. Relativism is definitely not any weaker when it comes to gender. "Traditional" does not mean harmless. The trope implies through its ubiquity that women are powerless. That contributes to and normalizes real-world sexism. That's bad, mmmmk? I'm not saying something so simplistic as "if it weren't for videogames, there'd be no sexism." BUT videogames do contribute to sexism via this trope. We've discussed that mechanism elaborately. I think degrading women is wrong, not good; most people agree. What's your reason for disagreeing? And if you don't actually disagree, come out and tell us your viewpoints. I'm starting to wonder if you actually misunderstand me or just don't want to understand me.

No, it is not naturally degrading.

Perhaps because you haven't been paying attention? And this is hardly an "academic" discussion. Anyway, I'm not going to play the moral relativism game with you. I can't show why anyone deserves any type of moral treatment ever under any circumstances. You can't prove a normative sentiment because there are no universally granted premises. So, necessarily, my opinion derives from my own scruples. What's the problem? My argument is that these narratives, through constant reinforcement of the figure of the disempowered female, communicate that women are themselves naturally helpless and thus need men. I think that's a sexist notion, and I am against it. I have repeatedly said that it's the pervasiveness of the trope, not the act of rescuing itself, that is the problem. Please read this carefully, because I think you'll agree that all this repeating myself is getting rather annoying.

Would you rather I called you an ass? It's your call, friend. I can't define rights. Maybe you can enlighten me. But my basic, innate morality tells me that it's wrong to degrade women, whether we're talking about mass media or not.

Construe away, friend. I think children have the right not to be trained to only experience half of their humanity, and that toward that end videogame narratives like these are damaging. Doesn't mean I'm against free speech, it just means I wish people weren't so shitty. If you think that makes me close-minded, so be it.

I wouldn't make too big deal out of the title, as "Zelda" is in all of the titles and look what's been done to her from day one. I mean, I see where you're coming from and I too look forward to the video.

What do you want me to say, EC? Rights come from God? Governments? You can't prove that rights "exist," so obviously I can't prove that women have the right not be degraded in the media. That said, your lack of empathy is astounding.

You see, you can gather all the anecdotal evidence you want, it doesn't prove that women are naturally given to certain roles and men to others. We (as a society) socialize our children differently depending on their gender, so it's a self-fulfilling prophecy to say that girls will naturally like pink, housework, etc. more. Do you think we see less women in STEM jobs because they're naturally worse at it, or because they've been conditioned not to incline toward them?

Eh, I suppose. I would argue that Link's status as main character and "the Hero" is pretty significant there, though. I look forward to Anita's video on sidekicks, as maybe she'll weigh in on that one. Also touche on Linebeck, you're right.

It should be the societal norm because men and women should have equal rights. Everyone should voluntarily come to this conclusion. And as to racism and sexism, explain to me the difference, please. Why is saying one group of people are naturally inferior (or "separate but equal?") different from saying another group is naturally inferior, etc.?

Lol. Way to out yourself as a person who doesn't understand feminism. It is for equal rights, not a reversal of existing power structures. And since women have been socialized (just as men have been) to prefer certain things, you can't use that as evidence that the gender roles are somehow natural.

Yuk yuk yuk. These are straw men, and pretty weak ones at that. There's a difference between asking for voluntary, principled self-"censoring" and mandatory censorship like book burning. I'll use another race example b/c it's actually a very similar civil rights issue. I don't want to see historical racist documents burnt, but I also don't wish to see modern people espousing racism or telling new, pro-racist narratives, even if they claim it's somehow "traditional." I think it would be best if everyone agreed that racism is bad and that we should leave it (intact) in the dustbin of history.

OK, I see the confusion. Let me keep quoting you first, for things I agree with, and then I'll clarify my thoughts. I already conceded SS, and I'll go ahead and explicitly concede your point: one damsel does not spoil a bunch of strong female characters, in theory (I think that the context/history of Zelda being a classic videogame damsel does sour her brief disempowerment in SS, but it's a relatively small gripe). BUT that's not what happens in most games, especially in the games Anita was talking about in her video. As I've been saying over and over, you very frequently see ONLY damsels in games that use this trope; the only women are damsels. And THAT is problematic, no? Examples like SS are actually quite rare when stacked against the huge list of damsel-only titles. I agree it's difficult to indict any particular work, but let me be clear: I think the first time the DiD trope was used, it wasn't sexist. Same goes for the second, third, maybe fourth time as well. But today, this trope is literally thousands of years old, and it's disappointing that game makers CONTINUE to use it. It supports many stereotypical and misogynistic ways of viewing women, and it's irresponsible at best for game makers to keep using it. So today, I would indeed consider the trope toxic in and of itself, even though on the abstract level I concede that it's not inherently, without context, a sexist trope.

It's still Zelda being made powerless, and her only salvation comes from a man. It's almost more reprehensible because of Zelda's history as a damsel and the fact that even the strongest woman can't save herself. Possession, by the way, is as disempowering as you can get, because you can't even control your own body. Fun fact: no male is ever possessed in the Zelda universe. The closest we ever get is impersonations of the King of Hyrule in MC, but it's established that he's not actually possessed, he's locked away in the basement. For women, though, we have Nabooru in OoT, Zelda in Tp and ST, and Impa, Nayru, AND Ambi in OoA... There may be more, I'll have to think on it.

No, but since when have videogames had to obey the rules of biology? Can Italian plumbers really jump ten feet in the air and shoot fireballs? I mean, Link is practically a 10-year-old in many of his games, so why couldn't a woman do what he does? Sexual differences aren't as developed that young. And many games have pulled off female sword-wielders effectively. A great example is Riven from League of Legends, who is a totally OP bruiser (not a mage, which is a fairly evenly gendered category, and not a support, which is mostly female because of women's stereotypical gender roles as nurturing and motherly): http://leagueoflegends.wikia.com/wiki/Riven Dude, I've addressed this over and over. It's not that men saving women is sexist, but the PROPORTION of female damsels to male "damsels" swings overwhelmingly in the female direction, and that PROPORTION is what makes it sexist. In addition, in many games, the only ways of being female are to be a helpless damsel. Consider the Marioverse: until maybe Rosalina, your options are Peach, Daisy, Pauline... all damsels. And that constant reinforcement implies that all women are powerless. Allow me to put it to you another way. If I wrote a show where the only black character was an illiterate dumbass criminal who has like 16 children by different mothers, is a deadbeat, etc. etc., would that be racist? By your logic, it would be hunky dory because it's just one black guy, I'm not saying all black men are like that, etc. etc. But that black character exists in a context, a context in which those attributes are stereotypes, stereotypes that are/were widely attributed to black men in real life. And to reinforce them in this way, where the only type of black person in my story conforms to the stereotype, is racist. I think you can do the math and see that representing the women in your story according to their stereotypes is sexist in the same way. Or do you think videogames and other cultural narratives spontaneously arise from some alien, context-less void? Now, I don't really understand your position. You're saying that use of the DiD trope in games is not sexist, even though the lack of female heroes is sexist, and that the DiD trope is a product of a sexist society and reflects the fact that sexism exists in our culture? So I guess videogames as a whole are sexist products, but individual games are not? Okay, man. Whatever. My opinion is that if DiD existed in a vacuum, it would not be sexist, but adding fuel to the fire is irresponsible and reinforces sexist readings. And let me quote myself to answer another of your points:

Well said, I second that.

Here's a list: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DamselInDistress?from=Main.DistressedDamsel It stops being the disempowerment of a single character who happens to be female when it's single characters who happen to be female getting disempowered 90% of the time. Makes you think that they don't just "happen to be female," huh? Look at it this way. If two candidates apply for a job, one black, one white, and the white guy gets the job, that's not necessarily racist. But what if the black guy never got the job, or only 10% of the time? We have 2 options - either racism is afoot, or black people are, in fact, almost always inferior applicants (i.e., racism is justified and true). Which do you support? Put another way: actions exist in context. There is nothing inherently wrong with some things, like a swastika, but in our current context, it's an extremely offensive symbol. Likewise with this trope - one instance is not offensive, but writers are recycling a trope in a market already glutted with instances of that trope. That context makes the trope offensive by suggesting that all women are helpless because the huge majority of major female characters in videogames are disempowered. Can you read? I literally just addressed this in the quote you just responded to. Anyone can save anyone, but when the gender relationship moves in one direction the vast majority of the time, it creates the impression that one gender is stronger than the other. It's not rocket science. Review my previous posts. Your skimming is ridiculous. So because 25% of the time seems oddly precise, it should be allowed to be 90% of the time? And yes, the lack of female heroes is significant as well, and rather serves as a corollary to this trope. This trope disempowers women, whereas the male hero trope empowers men (and, thus, not women). I've agreed to this several times. The problem is the distribution greatly favors male power, not female power.

I won't speak for the whole Tomb Raider series, which I've never played (although I know its reputation). But from what you've indicated, I would say, "No, it is not." And to repeat myself from earlier, even single instances of men saving women are not sexist - it becomes a problem when that's the gender relationship the huge majority of the time.