Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Jerykk

Real Name Jerykk   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname Jerykk
Email Concealed by request
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Apr 23, 2004, 02:42
Total Comments 14065 (Ninja)
User ID 20715
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ] Older >


News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
45. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Sep 3, 2014, 00:02 Jerykk
 
Beamer wrote on Sep 2, 2014, 23:37:
Mad Max RW wrote on Sep 2, 2014, 20:29:
NKD wrote on Sep 2, 2014, 20:10:

No one is suggesting people go out of their way to avoid all risk. But it seems reasonable for a high profile public figure like an A-List actress to take a few basic precautions.

Personal responsibility? Is that still a thing? I thought we lived in a fantasy land where people can walk into traffic with their eyes closed and are never hit.

Being a victim of a crime is personal responsibility now?

Taking rudimentary precautions to protect yourself against crime is a personal responsibility. Emphasis on "rudimentary." It doesn't take much effort to delete nude pictures of yourself. It takes even less effort to simply not take those pictures in the first place.

Your previous analogies were pretty bad. This situation is not in any way comparable to owning a car or a house or having a job. Those are things you have to do in order to survive in modern society. Taking nude pictures of yourself and storing them on a cloud-based service? Completely unnecessary and extremely risky if you're a celebrity who cares about their public image.

You say that life would be boring if people didn't take embarrassing pictures of themselves. Maybe you're right. Jennifer Lawrence's life has certainly become more interesting since the leak. That said, there are other ways to amuse yourself besides taking pictures that would ultimately humiliate you should they ever become public.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
32. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Sep 2, 2014, 16:26 Jerykk
 
Beamer wrote on Sep 2, 2014, 16:15:
Desalus wrote on Sep 2, 2014, 15:06:
Beamer wrote on Sep 2, 2014, 13:30:
Regardless, I don't get this "meet reality" thing. Because you're famous you shouldn't have any expectation of privacy? Where are you drawing that line? Should Erin Andrews have just expected that someone would drill through the peephole in her hotel room door and film her? I mean, meet reality!
Also, your credit card was replaced twice this year due to hacks? What the hell do you do that it keeps getting hacked? I've never had to replace a credit card for anything fraudulent. Twice in one year?

I concur; people’s private sex lives should remain private. Unfortunately that’s an unrealistic expectation for the world we live in. For instance you can have your computer or phone stolen, servers are hacked, account usernames and passwords are stolen, or it can simply come down to a jaded ex-partner posting nude photos of you on the internet. In the least, if you’re living in the USA, the NSA is spying on you (I remember reading that they enjoy sharing ‘private’ nude photos of attractive women among themselves when they find them). This is what ‘meet reality’ means. Celebrities, especially if they are female and attractive, should accept the fact that nothing is really secure on the internet and there are people who are actively trying to target them. It’s unfortunate but it’s reality.

All of those things, less the NSA, are punishable by jail time. They're crimes. Felonies.
You should have a reasonable expectation that people will not commit felonies against you.

I don't really see how your own expectations are in any way relevant to those who perpetrate such crimes. Expecting everyone to obey the law and act in accordance with your own principles and values is unrealistic. As such, precautions must be taken. It's why you lock your door at night. It's why you shred documents with sensitive info on them. It's why you use virus scanners. It's why you don't open suspicious e-mails. It's why you shouldn't take pictures of yourself doing embarrassing or incriminating things.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
13. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Sep 2, 2014, 12:29 Jerykk
 
I'll never understand the logic of people who takes pictures and/or videos of themselves nude or during sex. Sure, you're allowed to do that and you're entitled to your own privacy but what's the point of making those pictures/videos in the first place? Especially if you're a celebrity whose public image is very important. Just seems like a completely unnecessary risk.  
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
273. Re: Op Ed Sep 1, 2014, 21:42 Jerykk
 
Quinn wrote on Sep 1, 2014, 08:27:
We're seeing a very female-friendly Tomb Raider -- would any militant feminist complain about the latest TR? -- and a tough, awesome FemShep. Things are progressing. Though I agree with her cause, I personally disagree that she has to make such noise, with her overanalyzing, nitpicking, crybaby nonsense in videos like Ms. Male Character.

Yup. I wish people would put aside the politics and just try to examine Sarkeesian's arguments in an objective manner. It doesn't really matter who makes those arguments either. Whether it is Sarkeesian or Hitler or Obama or Gandhi, the arguments themselves are poorly conceived because they rely on terrible examples and flawed logic. If she provided a cogent argument based on valid examples and strong reasoning, she wouldn't be getting nearly as much hate and her message would be far more effective.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Alone in the Dark: Illumination Trailer, Details
3. Re: Alone in the Dark: Illumination Trailer, Details Sep 1, 2014, 16:29 Jerykk
 
So they've basically turned this into Left 4 Dark.  
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
247. Re: Op Ed Sep 1, 2014, 01:49 Jerykk
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Sep 1, 2014, 01:26:
I need my daily dose of A-Seven's links

After I watched this -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Km3DZQp0StE
I think any remaining issues are resolved though
Gaming press is corrupt, not all of it, but enough of it
Youtubers have more journalistic integrity than fucking self-proclaimed journalists (Kotaku)

I don't think the Zoe Quinn controversy proves that game journalists are corrupt. Nathan Grayson did not review Zoe Quinn's game. His affair with Quinn had no impact whatsoever on his journalistic work. Are games journalists bad at their jobs? Sure. Are they prone to jumping on white knight bandwagons? Yup. Are they often hypocritical and short-sighted? Indeed they are. But corrupt? I haven't seen anything that proves that.

EDIT: Whoops, should have watched the full video before posting. That Patricia Hernandez stuff is pretty shady and definitely shouldn't have been allowed.

This comment was edited on Sep 1, 2014, 01:56.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
245. Re: Op Ed Aug 31, 2014, 19:41 Jerykk
 
jdreyer wrote on Aug 31, 2014, 19:23:
Jerykk wrote on Aug 31, 2014, 18:53:
What irks me the most about her nonsensical arguments is that there are plenty of valid examples of sexism or misogyny in videogames. Just look at Japanese games in general. Killer Is Dead, Shadows of the Damned, Onechanbara, Dead or Alive, Lollipop Chainsaw, Fatal Frame, Yakuza, any JRPG made in the past ten years... there's no need to make up bullshit examples when you've got plenty of irrefutable examples right in front of you.

Yeah, this is my main complaint. Someone on a different site defended her by comparing her to MLK, by saying that Martin Luther King didn't sit politely by in order to further equal rights for blacks. My response was that MLK didn't make shit up about what whites were doing to blacks, he just took real-world examples and exposed and opposed them. She should do the same. I mean, holy shit, Dead or Alive Extreme Beach Volleyball could be the star of it's own video.

I think the reason why she doesn't just stick to Japanese games is because she wants to make it look like sexism in games is prevalent worldwide. Limiting her examples to Japanese games would undermine that agenda. It's the same reason why, when listing games that she approves of, she avoids big-budget, mainstream games and sticks to relatively obscure indie games. There are plenty of big-budget, mainstream games with strong female representations (The Last of Us, The Walking Dead, Tomb Raider, Uncharted, Heavenly Sword, Borderlands, Bioshock, etc) so it wouldn't be hard to cite them as examples of balanced gender representations. However, doing so would undermine her argument that mainstream games are sexist.

In fact, she'll often take games with strong female characters and completely ignore them so she can focus instead on generic, throwaway NPCs. The Bioshock series is a perfect example of that. Tenenbaum, Big Sister, Lamb, Elizabeth, Lutece, Fitzroy... plenty of strong, non-sexualized female characters that play pivotal roles in their respective games and all ignored so that Sarkeesian can point out how a female enemy is impaled onto a wall (just like many male enemies but hey, she's wearing a dress so it's sexualized violence amirite?). It's incredibly hypocritical of her to demand balanced gender representations when her own arguments are anything but. Hell, it would almost be comical if so many people didn't actually believe her drivel.

Textbooks are not necessarily scientific, at least that has been my experience a few times. Hell, look at creationism and intelligent design.

That may be true in some cases but as a whole, textbooks are seen as objective and scientific educational resources. Sarkeesian clearly views her own videos in the same light.

This comment was edited on Aug 31, 2014, 22:47.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
242. Re: Op Ed Aug 31, 2014, 19:05 Jerykk
 
yuastnav wrote on Aug 31, 2014, 18:54:
It's still not the same because she doesn't claim it's a study.
Although I agree that the thought that media influences your behaviour and thinking has merit.

You're arguing semantics. The entire series is treated as a study. Whether or not she explicitly declares it a study is irrelevant. She presents her arguments as facts intended to educate and inform viewers.

Here's the official description on her website:

The video series was created by Anita Sarkeesian in 2009 and largely serves as an educational resource to encourage critical media literacy and provide resources for media makers to improve their works of fiction.

Note the key words used: "educational," "resource" and "literacy." These are not the words you use to describe a blog or opinion piece (which the series is). These are the words you use to describe a textbook.

Not sure the Jack Thompson and game violence-real violence conflation is really comparable. Although Anita has mentioned a few studies, that's not really the crux of her argument. In fact it's the opposite. Jack argued that game violence fostered real violence. In this case it's real-world sexism resulting in game sexism (or used to be).

Except that's not actually true. At the end of the very first video, she says: "But it's undeniable that popular culture is a powerful influence in our lives and the damsel in distress trope, as a recurring trend, does help to normalize extremely toxic, patronizing and paternalistic attitudes about women." So yes, she is clearly stating that sexism in games encourages real-world sexism.

This comment was edited on Aug 31, 2014, 19:14.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
239. Re: Op Ed Aug 31, 2014, 18:53 Jerykk
 
What irks me the most about her nonsensical arguments is that there are plenty of valid examples of sexism or misogyny in videogames. Just look at Japanese games in general. Killer Is Dead, Shadows of the Damned, Onechanbara, Dead or Alive, Lollipop Chainsaw, Fatal Frame, Yakuza, any JRPG made in the past ten years... there's no need to make up bullshit examples when you've got plenty of irrefutable examples right in front of you.  
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
237. Re: Op Ed Aug 31, 2014, 18:31 Jerykk
 
yuastnav wrote on Aug 31, 2014, 17:38:
Or it could be that these are two completely different issues.

On one hand you had so-called studies which tried to link violence to video games.
On the other hand you have someone focusing on a specific trope and pointing out a number of video games which use this trope. Not a study. And is not trying to say that video games lead to sexist behaviour.

I don't really get the comparison with Jack Thompson.

The comparison is valid because both rely on flawed reasoning and a general ignorance of the games they describe. And Sarkeesian does indeed suggest that videogames can lead to sexist behavior. At the end of at least one of her videos, she talks about how popular culture shapes people's perceptions and attitudes towards women. In other words, how video games can lead to sexist behavior.

Here's a specific example of how Sarkeesian's logic can be applied to any social issue, whether it be violence or racism or whatever. This is an actual quote from her in regards to the fact that you can kill and drag the corpses of strippers in Hitman: Absolution:

"Players are meant to derive a perverse pleasure from desecrating the bodies of unsuspecting virtual female characters. It's a rush streaming from a carefully concocted mix of sexual arousal connected to the act of controlling and punishing representations of female sexuality."

Now, watch as I replace a couple of words and make it all about racism:

"Players are meant to derive a perverse pleasure from desecrating the bodies of unsuspecting virtual African-American characters. It's a rush streaming from a carefully concocted mix of sexual arousal connected to the act of controlling and punishing representations of African-American ethnicity."

Both arguments use the same flawed logic. The strippers in Hitman: Absolution are civilians. You are actively punished for hurting them. Same applies to any civilian in the game, including African-American ones. If I recorded a video of me killing a bunch of random African-American civilians and then claiming that Hitman encourages racist violence, you'd think I was an idiot. But when Sarkeesian does the same thing with women instead of African-Americans, you somehow overlook the blatant absurdity of her argument.

Her idiotic reasoning isn't limited to Hitman: Absolution either. She uses the same argument for almost every game that lets you kill random female NPCs. GTA, Sleeping Dogs, Watch_Dogs, Deus Ex, Just Cause 2, Fallout: New Vegas, Dishonored, etc. This is especially true if a game has strippers or prostitutes, in which case she'll specifically hunt them down and murder them on video so she can claim that the games encourage violence against sexualized women.

This comment was edited on Aug 31, 2014, 18:42.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Steam Top 10
6. Re: Steam Top 10 Aug 31, 2014, 17:53 Jerykk
 
Ozmodan wrote on Aug 31, 2014, 16:24:
I really wonder sometimes at gamers. Buying a game that is at least two months out makes no sense. Must be nice to have lots of cash to throw around. Must be nice to be omniscient to know it is a good game when no one has played it yet.

Some games are pretty safe bets. Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel will be more of the same. Civ: Beyond Earth will basically be more of the same as well. If you enjoyed the previous games in those series, there's a pretty good chance you'll enjoy the latest entries as well.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
235. Re: Op Ed Aug 31, 2014, 17:12 Jerykk
 
Christina H. Sommers @CHSommers · 22h
Is it true that game journalists challenged bad research linking video games to violence,but caved to feminist "studies" linking to sexism?

That's a really good point. If you replaced Sarkeesian with Jack Thompson and sexism with violence, journalists would be tearing apart these videos. Sarkeesian's arguments are just as illogical and unfounded as Thompson's, yet journalists (and many members of the gaming community, apparently) seem unwilling to scrutinize them and point out their obvious flaws.

It's really interesting that that Anita is treated like a hero while the very same people would scoff at Thompson. It could be due to the fact that feminism is the popular social issue right now and journalists don't want to go against the grain for fear of being accused of sexism. This was never the case with violence, as violence has never really been viewed as an issue by journalists in the gaming industry.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
51. Re: Op Ed Aug 30, 2014, 05:39 Jerykk
 
Beamer wrote on Aug 29, 2014, 13:01:
No, her entire point is a pattern.

Take, say, the damsel in distress trope. She isn't condemning individual games for using it (though some are lazy about it.) She's saying it's problematic that so many games use it.

It isn't an attack on games. It isn't condemning games. It's point out things games do that they could be better about.

Your Hitman argument falls flat. She says they exist solely to die. And yes, you're penalized for it, but all they can do is die. That's it. And they're the women in the game. They're just obstacles.

And sorry, Jerykk, I think the important thing isn't that we make sure her tactics are ok (and no, she doesn't outright lie.) The important thing is improving. So people don't like her tactics, then why do so many just discount the message. And her cause is being helped. A lot. While there's a lot of fan response against her, the industry response towards her has been almost unanimously positive. One of those is more important than the other.

Patterns need to be based on facts. Something isn't sexist if both sexes are equally represented. That's the problem with most of her examples. They ignore the fact that the things you can do to women can also be done to men. Your/her Hitman example is a perfect example of that. The strippers in Hitman: Absolution are civilians. The majority of NPCs (male or female) in any Hitman game are civilians. Civilians exist as obstacles that must be neutralized or avoided. None of this is specific to women. It's just the role that civilians (again, male or female) play in the Hitman games. Also, as I mentioned in another thread, there are plenty of women in Hitman: Absolution that do more than just die or act as background decoration. There are many female NPCs that will attack you upon detection and have their own unique backstories and personalities, along with dialogue and cutscenes.

And yes, Sarkeesian does outright lie. For example, she claims that most of the male victims of random crime events in Watch_Dogs will aggressively defend themselves. That's a lie. I've put about 30 hours into Watch_Dogs and seen at least a hundred crime events and in the vast majority of those, male victims are just as passive and defenseless as female victims. She also claims (and I quote) "players are meant to derive a perverse pleasure from desecrating the bodies of unsuspecting virtual female characters. It's a rush streaming from a carefully concocted mix of sexual arousal connected to the act of controlling and punishing representations of female sexuality." That's in reference to the fact that you can kill and drag the bodies of female strippers in Hitman: Absolution. Given the fact that you can kill and drag ALL NPCs (male or female) and that the game actively punishes you for killing civilians (male or female), how is that argument in any way accurate or honest? She makes it sound like Hitman is a violent rape simulator, for crying out loud.


Sarkeesian is essentially the Michael Moore of the gaming industry. Her contrived, misleading and often fabricated examples undermine the effectiveness of her message and only serve to create resistance and skepticism towards it. There will always be an extremist minority that will troll her regardless of how cogent or honest her arguments are. However, there's a larger portion of intelligent, informed and critical gamers who would actually respect and side with her if her arguments were valid. No offense but the only way you could watch her videos without being offended is if you already believed in her message, didn't play the games she cites and/or actively turned off your critical thinking ability so as to not undermine your beliefs. People have a tendency to turn a blind eye to logic or reason when hearing what they want to hear. "Preaching to the choir" is an apt phrase.

This comment was edited on Aug 30, 2014, 05:51.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
158. Re: Op Ed Aug 30, 2014, 02:40 Jerykk
 
Mashiki Amiketo wrote on Aug 30, 2014, 01:06:
Jerykk wrote on Aug 30, 2014, 00:53:
Gamasutra is simply a site that posts news and editorials from people in the games industry. It does not have a regular staff of writers pumping out drivel like Kotaku does. Every editorial is written by a guest writer.
That might be true, providing that the author Leigh Alexander wasn't the managing editor, or writer or whatever. And also has no clue about gaming culture, as witnessed by her previous social media commentary.

Anyway, rather suspicious isn't it? It smells just like that bit where all those writers were colluding and writing similar articles with similar view points. Wish I remember what the mail list is called, oh well. So today, we've got no less than 7 sites all writing the same crap as gamasutra. Something smells rotten.

Tossing this in as well which is apparently from a journalist that wishes to remain anonymous. I'll rank it as possibly true, especially considering the collusion going on right now with all of the same stories.

Leigh's article is the exception, not the rule. http://gamasutra.com/blogs/expert/

The fact that she posted her rant as a news article instead of a blog is pretty unprofessional, though. Gamasutra has generally done a good job of keeping that stuff separate.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
154. Re: Op Ed Aug 30, 2014, 00:53 Jerykk
 
Gamasutra is simply a site that posts news and editorials from people in the games industry. It does not have a regular staff of writers pumping out drivel like Kotaku does. Every editorial is written by a guest writer.  
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
146. Re: Op Ed Aug 29, 2014, 22:51 Jerykk
 
Beamer wrote on Aug 29, 2014, 18:34:
Would anyone even notice if Hitman had a few cut scenes where a female said something? Would anyone notice if Grand Theft Auto V had a female character you weren't supposed to hate? Women would, but how about the men?

You really need to stop referencing Hitman because you clearly know very little about the series. So here are the facts:

1) There are three types of NPCs in the Hitman games: civilians, hostiles and targets. Civilians are neutral and will either flee and/or call for help if they detect you as a threat. Hostiles will attack you as soon as they detect you as a threat. Targets can do either. The vast majority of NPCs (such as the strippers in Hitman: Absolution) are civilians. They exist as obstacles that you must either neutralize or avoid. The strippers are no different from any of the other civilians, male or female. And there are plenty of non-sexualized female civilians in the Hitman games.

2) There are 10 female targets in Hitman: Absolution, the newest entry in the series. They will attack you on sight if they detect you. In fact, 8 of them are specifically hunting you down. All of these female targets have established personalities and backstories and most of them have dialogue too. They have speaking roles in cutscenes as well.

3) Diana is the only character in the entire series that speaks to Agent 47 on a regular basis. She has also been in every game and is a key part of the story in the last two Hitman games.

So please stop drinking Sarkeesian's Kool-Aid. Women are not just background decoration or victims in the Hitman games, despite what Sarkeesian's misleading videos may suggest.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
48. Re: Op Ed Aug 29, 2014, 12:42 Jerykk
 
Beamer wrote on Aug 29, 2014, 11:18:
Jerykk wrote on Aug 28, 2014, 23:44:
Sarkeesian is just really bad at supporting her points. She does research on games and looks for things that support her agenda, ignoring context or anything else that might undermine her argument.

Nobody is going to claim that misogyny doesn't exist in games. However, a game isn't misogynistic just because it contains prostitutes that can be killed. About 90% of Sarkeesian's examples ignore context completely. Sure, you can beat up women in Sleeping Dogs and stick them in your trunk but you can do the exact same thing to men. Sure, the random crime events in Watch Dogs do have passive female victims but they also have passive male victims. Sure, there are dead, scantily clad female bodies in Mafia 2 BUT THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU HAVE A SHOOTOUT IN A STRIP CLUB. Cripes.

Imagine if I played GTA, went out of my way to specifically kill a bunch of black NPCs, took the money that randomly dropped and then declared that the game was racist because it rewarded me for killing black people. Pretty absurd, right? Except that's the exact logic that Sarkeesian uses for most of her examples. She's the epitome of the Social Justice Warrior. She finds social issues where there are none and automatically dismisses anyone who disagrees.

If you watch her videos, she never actually calls a game misogynist. She calls characters in it, but usually when the character beats are that he is. And she doesn't criticize that when it's the villain.

But her point isn't "these games are misogynist," it's that "women aren't portrayed well in games and games have a lot of misogynist elements." There's a huge, huge, huge difference there.

She doesn't have to explicitly use the word "misogynist." Her entire series is devoted to convincing people that sexism is rampant in videogames. Every example she provides is used to that end. I'd be totally fine with that if she used good examples. But she doesn't. She ignores context and provides intentionally misleading footage. For example, in a previous video, she said that the strippers in Hitman: Absolution exist solely so that men can kill them and play with their bodies and that game actively encourages this. She then showed footage of 47 killing the strippers and dragging their bodies around. That's utter bullshit. If you kill strippers (or any other civilians) in Hitman, you are penalized for doing so. You lose points, you lose money, you gain notoriety (in Blood Money, at least). The murder of civilians (female or otherwise) is actively discouraged. Hitman wasn't some sort of exception, either. She makes similarly ridiculous claims with games like Sleeping Dogs, Watch_Dogs, Just Cause 2, Bioshock, GTA, Dishonored, Fallout, Kane & Lynch, etc.

It's okay to agree with her message. There definitely is sexism in games and it should be addressed. However, you need to be critical of how that message is conveyed and Sarkeesian conveys her message in the worst way possible: by ignoring context and straight out lying in many cases. That doesn't help her cause. If anything, it gives the trolls more fuel and gives rational people less reason to agree with her.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Interviews
82. Re: Evening Interviews Aug 29, 2014, 05:13 Jerykk
 
Jensen wrote on Aug 29, 2014, 01:45:
Jerykk wrote on Aug 29, 2014, 00:48:
Of course, the mere fact that she's a prostitute would be enough for Sarkeesian to declare her an example of misogyny (assuming that she actually played the first two Hitman games).

Sarkeesian almost never uses inflammatory or accusatory languages in her videos. She only uses a form of the word "misogyny" a few times, and every time she uses it, she is referring to NPCs in the game, and not the game itself or the creators of the game.
I don't see anywhere she says that there shouldn't be prostitutes in games.

People are reading a lot more into her videos than what is actually there.

I feel like you aren't reading at all into her videos. The whole point of the series is to convince people that misogyny and sexism is prevalent in videogames. She avoids using those specific words directly because she's trying to appear objective and those words are pretty charged. Instead, she refers to "gender signifiers" or "background decoration" as ways in which videogames are sexist.

Any time a game has strippers or prostitutes, Sarkeesian cites it as an example of sexism. She did it in her latest video and the one before that and probably every single one of her videos. It doesn't matter if the stripper or prostitute makes perfect sense within the context of the game, she'll list it anyway.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Interviews
77. Re: Evening Interviews Aug 29, 2014, 00:48 Jerykk
 
But, having played a Hitman game and Skyrim, I can say there's a huge difference between them. One has women, which you interact with in many ways, which play many roles, and which factor into the plot. The other has women which you kill. One has men which you interact with, in many ways, which play many roles, and factor into the plot. So does the other.

I feel like you haven't actually played any of the Hitman games. Diana, your handler, is the only character you interact with on a regular basis and she's a non-sexualized female (at least, she was until Absolution). She's also the only character that has any real character development. The rest of the characters you interact with? Primarily male targets who you brutally murder without hesitation or remorse. Oh yeah, there are a couple of missions in the first two games where a prostitute will help you complete your mission if you help her escape. Is that sexist? No, not really. She only agrees to help you if you help her, making it a negotiation where both sides have equal leverage. Her occupation also makes sense given the locations where you find her. Of course, the mere fact that she's a prostitute would be enough for Sarkeesian to declare her an example of misogyny (assuming that she actually played the first two Hitman games).

In any case, Sarkeesian was right to point out the issues with Blood Money's marketing. The fact that all the women were beautiful and scantily clad (or naked) and posed in seductive manners was a bit misogynistic. However, developers have nothing to do with marketing so they can't be blamed for that. They can, however, be blamed for the ridiculous outfits that the Saints wear in Absolution. I'm surprised Sarkeesian didn't include those in her video, as that's a valid example of sexism.

This comment was edited on Aug 29, 2014, 01:00.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
43. Re: Op Ed Aug 28, 2014, 23:44 Jerykk
 
Sarkeesian is just really bad at supporting her points. She does research on games and looks for things that support her agenda, ignoring context or anything else that might undermine her argument.

Nobody is going to claim that misogyny doesn't exist in games. However, a game isn't misogynistic just because it contains prostitutes that can be killed. About 90% of Sarkeesian's examples ignore context completely. Sure, you can beat up women in Sleeping Dogs and stick them in your trunk but you can do the exact same thing to men. Sure, the random crime events in Watch Dogs do have passive female victims but they also have passive male victims. Sure, there are dead, scantily clad female bodies in Mafia 2 BUT THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU HAVE A SHOOTOUT IN A STRIP CLUB. Cripes.

Imagine if I played GTA, went out of my way to specifically kill a bunch of black NPCs, took the money that randomly dropped and then declared that the game was racist because it rewarded me for killing black people. Pretty absurd, right? Except that's the exact logic that Sarkeesian uses for most of her examples. She's the epitome of the Social Justice Warrior. She finds social issues where there are none and automatically dismisses anyone who disagrees.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14065 Comments. 704 pages. Viewing page 5.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo