The Awesome Videos Thread (with Extra Sauce!)

Chad Sexington

Chad Sexington

figmentPez said:
I thought the point was obvious, to bring attention to a common trope in video games and spark discussion over the social ramifications of that trope.
Click to expand...
This is sort of the like joke about raising awareness for cancer: who isn't aware of cancer? "Women are objectified in video games." is not a half an hour discussion, it's a one sentence statement of fact that we all (or nearly all) know.

To then spend half an hour proving this by listing examples may verify the statement, but it doesn't exactly highlight social ramifications or create discussion. If you have time to read the article I linked, I recommend it. His argument centres on that she addresses old video games ignoring their cultural, political and social points of genesis: something relatively simple on which to perform at least cursory research.
 
figmentPez

figmentPez

Staff member
Chad Sexington said:
This is sort of the like joke about raising awareness for cancer: who isn't aware of cancer? "Women are objectified in video games." is not a half an hour discussion, it's a one sentence statement of fact that we all (or nearly all) know.
Click to expand...
Yes, people are aware that cancer exists, but a lot of people aren't aware of the fine details. That young people get cancer, that certain types of cancer are influenced by behavior or diet, that men get breast cancer, that there are steps to take to make sure that cancer gets detected early, that there are multiple treatment options, etc., etc. This isn't just a matter of "Are women objectified in games?" but "How are women objectified in games? Just how prevalent is it? How does it happen? Why does it happen? Is anything happening to change that?" The videos produced by Feminist Frequency, thus far, are far from a complete and balanced view on the issue, but there have also only been two parts of one subject released. They might get better, they might get worse, but the fact of the matter is that the issue does need discussion. You make take for granted that "everyone knows women are objectified in games", but I'm betting most people aren't aware of the specifics, or the broad range of ways in which it happens.

To then spend half an hour proving this by listing examples may verify the statement, but it doesn't exactly highlight social ramifications or create discussion. If you have time to read the article I linked, I recommend it. His argument centres on that she addresses old video games ignoring their cultural, political and social points of genesis: something relatively simple on which to perform at least cursory research.
Click to expand...
I don't understand this argument. How does claiming "that's just the way it used to be" in any way invalidate showing how the history of the trope continues to modern day? She's not just citing games from the 80's, she's got examples from throughout history, including modern day. How does saying "it's a Japanese thing" make it have any less of an impact on world culture? (Especially since Americans made some of these games.) Yes, a lot of these games came about because of Japanese culture, but they were then exported to other markets, to have a cultural impact there, independent of the culture of origin.
 
Chad Sexington

Chad Sexington

figmentPez said:
Yes, people are aware that cancer exists, but a lot of people aren't aware of the fine details. That young people get cancer, that certain types of cancer are influenced by behavior or diet, that men get breast cancer, that there are steps to take to make sure that cancer gets detected early, that there are multiple treatment options, etc., etc. This isn't just a matter of "Are women objectified in games?" but "How are women objectified in games? Just how prevalent is it? How does it happen? Why does it happen? Is anything happening to change that?" The videos produced by Feminist Frequency, thus far, are far from a complete and balanced view on the issue, but there have also only been two parts of one subject released. They might get better, they might get worse, but the fact of the matter is that the issue does need discussion. You make take for granted that "everyone knows women are objectified in games", but I'm betting most people aren't aware of the specifics, or the broad range of ways in which it happens.



I don't understand this argument. How does claiming "that's just the way it used to be" in any way invalidate showing how the history of the trope continues to modern day? She's not just citing games from the 80's, she's got examples from throughout history, including modern day. How does saying "it's a Japanese thing" make it have any less of an impact on world culture? (Especially since Americans made some of these games.) Yes, a lot of these games came about because of Japanese culture, but they were then exported to other markets, to have a cultural impact there, independent of the culture of origin.
Click to expand...
Did you read the article? Because then you would know that he isn't saying "that's the way it used to be" or "it's a Japanese thing."

He's saying, it came out of a culture that didn't have a good understanding of feminism, and when it did come to the US, the US was often the one who created more positive female role models, often changing people like Peach or Zelda from helpless to the only wise characters surrounded by bumbling males.

Also, I don't understand your argument that this is just one part of a whole and therefore I can't criticise it for being lacking. I totally can, because its current state is not adequate for formulating an argument. She has provided no reason I should be invested in this as a concern, or even that it is a concern. She has just provided a list. The part isn't immune to criticism just because the whole may be superior.
 
figmentPez

figmentPez

Staff member
Chad Sexington said:
Did you read the article? Because then you would know that he isn't saying "that's the way it used to be" or "it's a Japanese thing."
Click to expand...
Yes, I read the article. If he's saying something else, then I don't know what that is. Maybe I'll reread it when I'm not dizzy from coughing.

He's saying, it came out of a culture that didn't have a good understanding of feminism, and when it did come to the US, the US was often the one who created more positive female role models, often changing people like Peach or Zelda from helpless to the only wise characters surrounded by bumbling males.
Click to expand...
That doesn't change that the US still created a lot of other games on the list, and that the Zelda games continue to be popular worldwide. Part 3 of the video, still to come, will look at subversions of the trope, we'll see if any of the US's influence on Japanese created female characters shows up there.

Also, I don't understand your argument that this is just one part of a whole and therefore I can't criticise it for being lacking. I totally can, because its current state is not adequate for formulating an argument. She has provided no reason I should be invested in this as a concern, or even that it is a concern. She has just provided a list. The part isn't immune to criticism just because the whole may be superior.
Click to expand...
I think it's completely fair to criticize examples, Coelasquid/Kelly Turnbull has a good commentary on that, however no amount of "well this the cultural explanation for why that is" negates the fact that it is out there, and is part of culture worldwide, part of the history of the trope, and continues to influence gaming today. The lack of feminism in Japan may be the reason that some of these damsels are in distress, but it is not the reason for all of them, and it doesn't remove the cultural impact of those games.
 
Chad Sexington

Chad Sexington

But the article is not arguing that it negates the trope. It is saying she has given no reason to care about these tropes. Firstly, why should we care about tropes from 30+ year old games? Why should we care about them in contemporary games? Does the trope from the Japanese games influence modern ones? If so, how, and why, if earlier when it was abundant in Japan they were being changed for American audiences? The investigation of the trope would be infinitely more valuable to us than lists of occurrences of the trope, and lists of subversions of the trope -and since that video isn't out yet, maybe it won't be a list, but I have good cause to believe it will be.

If I wanted to know all the cases of Damsel In Distress in video games, I would read TVTropes.

My beef, and I do note that this is mine and no longer my argument about the article I linked, is that I feel she isn't starting a conversation, continuing a conversation or bringing something new to a conversation. What she appears to be doing is saying, "Women are being objectified, take note of when and where." It's information without knowledge -not to say she's speaking without knowledge, but that she isn't providing knowledge. Context, action, concern, reason, implications... I feel like this is absent.
 
Frank

Frank

Bill Burr completely shitting on a terrible heckler crowd (who had been making a game of fucking with all the comics) for 13 straight minutes. Shock and awe, it's Philadelphia. This has been around for a while, but I'd never seen it.

This is pretty foul in terms of language, he gets pretty offensive.

 
Ravenpoe

Ravenpoe

Frank said:
Bill Burr completely shitting on a terrible heckler crowd (who had been making a game of fucking with all the comics) for 13 straight minutes. Shock and awe, it's Philadelphia. This has been around for a while, but I'd never seen it.

This is pretty foul in terms of language, he gets pretty offensive.

Click to expand...
The crowd seems to take it pretty well, actually. I was surprised.
 
PatrThom

PatrThom

I think some more effort could've turned this from really good into Truly Epic, but it's still rather satisfying.

--Patrick
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top