We store cookies, you can get more info from our privacy policy.
3DSWiiU

Episode 78: Tropes vs Connectivity

by Alex Culafi, Andy Goergen, Zack Kaplan, Kimberly Keller, Carmine Red, Neal Ronaghan, and Scott Thompson - March 24, 2013, 12:22 pm PDT
Total comments: 21

Lego City: Undercover, Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon, Pokémon Mystery Dungeon, and a discussion about the Tropes vs Women series.

Download in AAC Format

Subscribe to AAC Feed

Download in MP3 Format

Subscribe to MP3 Feed

Subscribe via iTunes (Please rate and review, too!)

Welcome to Episode 78 of Connectivity! We have two segments for you this week.

Starting the show off is a "What We've Been Playing" segment with Alex, Neal, and Andy. The trio talks about a bunch of current and upcoming games, including Lego City: Undercover, Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon, and Pokémon Mystery Dungeon.

After that, Carmine, Scott, Kim, and Zack discuss the first video in the Tropes vs Women in Video Games series. The gang covers the initial controversy surrounding the Kickstarter campaign, the content of the first video, and the overall place for a discussion about women in video games. Guaranteed to be divisive or your money back!

That's it for this week. Have some constructive thoughts about the Tropes series? Click here to send 'em in. Also, if you are going to be in Boston for PAX, make sure to hang out with us all weekend and be a part of our live game of "Who Wants to be a Nintendoaire?" on Sunday at 11 am!

This episode edited by Scott Thompson.

Talkback

FjurbanskiMarch 24, 2013

There should definitely be somebody out there taking the issue of sexism in games as seriously as Sarkeesian is, but from what I've seen, she isn't the right person to do it.


I've seen people on youtube put up videos of equal or higher quality than hers (and at a faster rate), and they didn't need $6,000 dollars to do it. Let alone ~$160,000. I'm pretty sure it wasn't her intention to scam people, but let's be honest, how much of that money could actually be going into these videos? From what I've seen, these are the types of videos that other people do for free. Where is the rest of the money going? That right there is enough for me to stop and consider than someone (not just Sarkeesian) might not be the type of person I can trust.


That said, I obviously agree that the way lots of people have been treating her is absolutely unacceptable. Not because she's a woman, but just because people will treat anyone on the internet like utter trash if they disagree with them. Death threats and other horrible things are the norm for both men and women, and it's disgusting, and it should go away.


But, as with everything on the internet, there have also been enough legitimate complaints about Sarkeesian for me to be wary of her.

Quote from: Fjurbanski

There should definitely be somebody out there taking the issue of sexism in games as seriously as Sarkeesian is, but from what I've seen, she isn't the right person to do it.

...

But, as with everything on the internet, there have also been enough legitimate complaints about Sarkeesian for me to be wary of her.

I agree with you Fjurbanski. At first, I thought the arguments against Sarkeesian were wholly one-sided, but after watching some of her older videos and finding the one or two snippets of actual rational, level-headed criticism of her on the internet (out of the thousands of... junk), I can see where she might not have a perfect pedigree for the job. (Then again, isn't asking for perfection a bit much?)

But I'm very happy that she's doing it anyways. I'm very happy that SOMEONE'S talking about these issues, and I'm very happy that the issues are starting to become more public. The more this gets talked about in the open, the more likely other people will start to share their own views and perspectives on it. Then it won't matter that Sarkeesian may or may not be ideal for the task: we won't need her anymore. People will be able to talk about these issues openly and freely and decide for themselves.

Oh, and personally, I have no issue with her asking for $6000 on Kickstarter to make these videos. I always thought that was what Kickstarter was... well... isn't that what Kickstarter is for?

FjurbanskiMarch 24, 2013

Well I'm certainly not asking for perfection. But too much stuff surrounding Sarkeesian makes me raise one eyebrow and go, "Hmmm..." Which is not the case for a lot of people, even though no one is perfect.


And yes, that is what Kickstarter is for, but my point was that when other people can do what she's doing for free without sacrificing any quality, it makes me wonder what all that money in the Kickstarter went to. If she had just gotten the $6,000, or even a small amount over, I wouldn't think twice about it. But she made ~$160,000. That's about 26 times her goal. Is all of that $160,000 going to be put into things related to the videos? Videos that do not cost anywhere near that amount of money to produce? I certainly hope so, because otherwise (whether or not she intended it) it becomes a scam. That's what I'm saying.


I'm always a little wary of Kickstarters to begin with, and this is the only Kickstarter I've seen where the person got waaaaaaay more money than they needed. It just plants seeds of doubt in my mind.

TJ SpykeMarch 24, 2013

Quote from: Fjurbanski

and this is the only Kickstarter I've seen where the person got waaaaaaay more money than they needed. It just plants seeds of doubt in my mind.

What about the Penny Arcade guys? Kickstarter is to help fund projects, but they abused Kickstarter to essentially have fans pay just to get rid of ads. At BEST, that violated the spirit of Kickstarter, at worst it flat out violated the rules (specifically: No "fund my life" projects.
Examples include projects to pay tuition or bills, go on vacation, or buy a new camera.) as they were using Kickstarter ONLY to pay their bills but Kickstarter let them get away with it since they get a percentage of all the money raised.

ResettisCousinMarch 24, 2013

I don't understand holding the "over donation" against her. Is there a way in the Kickstarter system to stop taking pledges once the goal is reached? If not, why is her project discredited based on the amount of money given? Even if there is / was, it seems like some people are bitter that the topic being discussed is important enough to so many people that raising this amount of money was possible in the first place. By the way, good to hear a female voice on the podcast. Hopefully we'll hear more even when sexism isn't the topic.

FjurbanskiMarch 25, 2013

Quote from: TJ

What about the Penny Arcade guys? Kickstarter is to help fund projects, but they abused Kickstarter to essentially have fans pay just to get rid of ads. At BEST, that violated the spirit of Kickstarter, at worst it flat out violated the rules (specifically: No "fund my life" projects.
Examples include projects to pay tuition or bills, go on vacation, or buy a new camera.) as they were using Kickstarter ONLY to pay their bills but Kickstarter let them get away with it since they get a percentage of all the money raised.

Never heard of that until now. But it sucks, and that's the kind of issue I'm getting at here. How do I know that the vast amount of money she got over her goal is not going into personal things? From what I've seen, there's no way to know. Not just with Sarkeesian, but with ANY Kickstarter. For video game Kickstarters, it's a little easier to believe, because I know they cost a lot to develop. But for youtube videos that we know people can do for free? It raises questions and concerns. Like I said, this applies to all Kickstarters (one of the reasons I'm not sure how I feel about them). Sarkeesian's just sticks out because she's been talked about so much, and because her total goes very, very far over her goal.

Quote from: ResettisCousin

I don't understand holding the "over donation" against her. Is there a way in the Kickstarter system to stop taking pledges once the goal is reached? If not, why is her project discredited based on the amount of money given? Even if there is / was, it seems like some people are bitter that the topic being discussed is important enough to so many people that raising this amount of money was possible in the first place. By the way, good to hear a female voice on the podcast. Hopefully we'll hear more even when sexism isn't the topic.

Because people donate money to a Kickstarter expecting that money to be put directly into the project. When the money raised goes a little over the goal, it's easy to see how that extra money can go into the project. When the money raised is $152,922 over, and the person is just making youtube videos, my skeptical nature questions whether or not all of that money is going into the project and not into personal things. Kickstarters are to support projects, not people.


And I don't know enough about Kickstarter to know if they do any kind of "quality control" to make sure that people are using the money the way they're supposed to. If they do, fine. If they don't, then it's kind of a Wild West scenario, and anything could happen. So how could I not be skeptical?


Here's what I would like to see. If this subject is so important (which it is), then I'd like to see sites like NWR and podcasts like this to do more than just have one podcast about Sarkeesian and what she thinks about sexism in games. Do more of your own segments. Have women on the podcasts more often, and not just when you're talking about sexism. Is that not in its own way slightly sexist? We (the site and the commenters) should be more proactive in this discussion on our own, rather than just talking about someone talking about it.


That's how you're really going to get people to pay attention. Legitimate or not, people don't like Sarkeesian, and lots of people just won't listen to her. But if enough people that are already trusted or liked start talking about it, it will get the attention it deserves. Because unlike what others may think, I don't believe male gamers are so vehemently opposed to this topic. You remember Other M? The majority of backlash against that game was how the story ruined Samus' character by making her subservient to a man. Nobody said, "Hooray! Now Samus is finally taking orders from a man!" People were mad that one of the strongest female figures in gaming was turned into a stereotype.


Long post, but whatever. It's an important topic, right?


TL;DR
If you want change, don't sit back and expect Sarkeesian to do it alone.

ejamerMarch 25, 2013

Quote from: ResettisCousin

I don't understand holding the "over donation" against her. Is there a way in the Kickstarter system to stop taking pledges once the goal is reached? If not, why is her project discredited based on the amount of money given? Even if there is / was, it seems like some people are bitter that the topic being discussed is important enough to so many people that raising this amount of money was possible in the first place. By the way, good to hear a female voice on the podcast. Hopefully we'll hear more even when sexism isn't the topic.

I think it's reasonable for people who donated to hear how the excess funding will be used. People give because it's a topic that deserves attention, and (I imagine) most people would like to see those gifts put to effective use.

Based on other KickStarter projects, it's also reasonable to expect Sarkeesian to expand her goals given the amount of money received. "Stretch goals" are a common term, and most projects that greatly exceed their initial goals either have or find ways to spend that money making the end product better. In this case, that could  mean expanding the presentation with analysis from experts in the field, or upping the production quality, or making the results available to a wider population, or dedicating more time on research. There are many ways that increased funding could result in a better end product. However, so far I haven't seen or heard of any change from the base plan - to be fair I haven't been actively looking - and the initial video certainly didn't take long to come out or push any boundaries (especially given her academic/professional background).

Long story short: Accountability and credibility go hand-in-hand if you ask me. Sarkeesian hasn't done anything wrong, but leaving questions lingering about how excess donations are handled won't help her message.

Quote from: Fjurbanski

Never heard of that until now. But it sucks, and that's the kind of issue I'm getting at here. How do I know that the vast amount of money she got over her goal is not going into personal things? From what I've seen, there's no way to know. Not just with Sarkeesian, but with ANY Kickstarter. For video game Kickstarters, it's a little easier to believe, because I know they cost a lot to develop. But for youtube videos that we know people can do for free? It raises questions and concerns. Like I said, this applies to all Kickstarters (one of the reasons I'm not sure how I feel about them). Sarkeesian's just sticks out because she's been talked about so much, and because her total goes very, very far over her goal.

I think a lack of direct accountability mechanisms is a common and valid criticism of Kickstarter. On the one-hand, it makes the service very easy for indies to hook into, a lack of regulations and red tape give independent creators an chance to use Kickstarter without signing deals or rights away, and without a lot of additional, expensive, time-consuming work and admin. On the other hand, I think you're right, this sort of deregulation makes it a bit of a "Buyer beware" situation. I hope that none of Sarkeesian's 7000 donors have "donor's remorse."

Edit: Here is what Kickstarter says about Accountability: http://www.kickstarter.com/help/faq/kickstarter%20basics#Acco

Quote from: ejamer

I think it's reasonable for people who donated to hear how the excess funding will be used. People give because it's a topic that deserves attention, and (I imagine) most people would like to see those gifts put to effective use.

Sarkeesian did add stretch goals. She started with five videos, then she doubled that to 10, then she added two more bonus videos, then she added a free classroom curriculum that she'd create. Since she looks to be doing at least two videos from the Damsels in Distress Trope, we may actually want to double the number of videos she'll produce even though she hasn't promised such. These were multiple stretch goals up to about the $26,000 mark, after which I wonder if she gave up promising additional stretch goals because the donations had exceeded her expectations so much that she had to retool the project completely.

I think it's right to wonder what all that money went to, but I believe that Sarkeesian has stated that this has allowed her Feminist Frequency work to scale up from a side-project to a full-time endeavor. She posted a picture once of a huge pile of physical games she'd bought for research, and it definitely takes a lot of time to actually play through these if we assume the research is in-depth. I know she's also mentioned being able to bring on a dedicated researcher to the project, and hire her producer full-time as well, so evidently this is more than a one-person team. I wouldn't be surprised if she's been able to upgrade her studio space and equipment as well.

And I think Scott said this in the podcast, but the kickstarter's success may have made Sarkeesian extend her timeline and put more work into research and the tone for these. I found some of her previous videos and her opinions a little precipitant, but this latest one seems surprisingly more even-handed and much less pointed. I'm speculating, but this may be the result of a more in-depth and time-consuming research and editorial process due to the money she raised.

Quote from: Fjurbanski

Here's what I would like to see. If this subject is so important (which it is), then I'd like to see sites like NWR and podcasts like this to do more than just have one podcast about Sarkeesian and what she thinks about sexism in games. Do more of your own segments. Have women on the podcasts more often, and not just when you're talking about sexism. Is that not in its own way slightly sexist? We (the site and the commenters) should be more proactive in this discussion on our own, rather than just talking about someone talking about it.

I agree completely, and that's why I'm really happy that we're talking about this here. If the only person who ever talks about this is Sarkeesian, it won't have changed anything. I hope this does become a wider and more widespread discussion, and that the culture of gaming changes to accept more views and voices on this topic. I know for a fact that while I appreciate Sarkeesian's opinions, she doesn't speak for me.

Speaking of getting more voices and different views out there, I DO believe that NWR is hiring... *hint hint* ^_^ Check out the jobs link at the bottom of the page?

ejamerMarch 25, 2013

Quote from: Kairon

...

Quote from: ejamer

I think it's reasonable for people who donated to hear how the excess funding will be used. People give because it's a topic that deserves attention, and (I imagine) most people would like to see those gifts put to effective use.

Sarkeesian did add stretch goals. She started with five videos, then she doubled that to 10, then she added two more bonus videos, then she added a free classroom curriculum that she'd create. Since she looks to be doing at least two videos from the Damsels in Distress Trope, we may actually want to double the number of videos she'll produce even though she hasn't promised such. These were multiple stretch goals up to about the $26,000 mark, after which I wonder if she gave up promising additional stretch goals because the donations had exceeded her expectations so much that she had to retool the project completely.

I think it's right to wonder what all that money went to, but I believe that Sarkeesian has stated that this has allowed her Feminist Frequency work to scale up from a side-project to a full-time endeavor. She posted a picture once of a huge pile of physical games she'd bought for research, and it definitely takes a lot of time to actually play through these if we assume the research is in-depth. I know she's also mentioned being able to bring on a dedicated researcher to the project, and hire her producer full-time as well, so evidently this is more than a one-person team. I wouldn't be surprised if she's been able to upgrade her studio space and equipment as well.

And I think Scott said this in the podcast, but the kickstarter's success may have made Sarkeesian extend her timeline and put more work into research and the tone for these. I found some of her previous videos and her opinions a little precipitant, but this latest one seems surprisingly more even-handed and much less pointed. I'm speculating, but this may be the result of a more in-depth and time-consuming research and editorial process due to the money she raised.


...

Thank you for spelling that out. I wish that more people/sites who took the time to talk about how much money she raked in would go into half as much detail.  I also wish that she had a way to make this kind of information more visible (again, maybe it is somewhere and hasn't been brought to my attention) so that instead of hearing "she mentioned this, wouldn't be surprised about that" people had solid numbers to point to.


Also, let me clarify one thing. I'm not a fan of Sarkeesian, but this is an important topic and one that deserves to be talked about. She's brave to take on a big and difficult topic that has such a big and difficult audience. Regardless of my feelings about her work, the discussions that are being spawned from it are invaluable.

Quote from: ejamer

Thank you for spelling that out. I wish that more people/sites who took the time to talk about how much money she raked in would go into half as much detail.  I also wish that she had a way to make this kind of information more visible (again, maybe it is somewhere and hasn't been brought to my attention) so that instead of hearing "she mentioned this, wouldn't be surprised about that" people had solid numbers to point to.

I'm pretty sure of what I wrote there, but I don't have time to go back and link dive to confirm it. Most of what I related came from the backlog in her feministfrequency.com site and kickstarer too, so I think this information is available, just not front and center. Actually, she has an entire series of "Backers Only" updates in Kickstarter (I didn't know Kickstarter let you do that!) that I can't access. I'm starting to wish that I DID donate to the campaign now just so I could sate my curiousity on what she said there. Did anyone out there donate to her campaign? Anyone willing to give me a peek behind the curtains?

ResettisCousinMarch 25, 2013

"Because people donate money to a Kickstarter expecting that money to be put directly into the project. When the money raised goes a little over the goal, it's easy to see how that extra money can go into the project. When the money raised is $152,922 over, and the person is just making youtube videos, my skeptical nature questions whether or not all of that money is going into the project and not into personal things. Kickstarters are to support projects, not people."

There are a couple giant assumptions in this post. Her supporters saw what her current total was when they donated. They saw her added videos and stretch goals, if applicable. What if a significant portion of her donations were simply votes of confidence in the cause behind the kickstarter? Why does it seem like almost all of the criticism I've read of her overflowing response has been from people that seemingly weren't backers themselves?

I think it's fair to criticize KickStarter in general as to the terms of their crowdsourcing arrangements, but since Sarkeesian reached her $6000 in... one day, I believe? I'd like to think that pretty much the majority of people gave money to her Kickstarter KNOWING it was being overfunded to a grand extent.

Personally, I think that's a wonderful thing. People showed an outpouring of support and solidarity with her in the face of the backlash, and they backed up their words with their pocketbooks.

It might be a problem when it comes to living up to that grandiose outpouring of generous giving, but frankly, it's one of those problems that are nice to have.

FjurbanskiMarch 25, 2013

Quote from: ResettisCousin

There are a couple giant assumptions in this post. Her supporters saw what her current total was when they donated. They saw her added videos and stretch goals, if applicable. What if a significant portion of her donations were simply votes of confidence in the cause behind the kickstarter? Why does it seem like almost all of the criticism I've read of her overflowing response has been from people that seemingly weren't backers themselves?

It doesn't matter why someone donated money. That money still has to be put directly into the Kickstarter. When I looked at her Kickstarter page I saw no stretch goals, and I saw nothing about how that extra money was going to be spent.


If what Carmine says is true, and she has al this big stuff planned, then fine.

Quote from: Fjurbanski

If what Carmine says is true, and she has al this big stuff planned, then fine.

Yeah, though there's still no Kickstarter-mandated accountability tracking mechanism. I'm supportive of Sarkeesian, but I honestly don't think Kickstarter is set up to provide certainty as to how the excess of the donated money is used. I think the only thing Kickstarter asks is that the thing doesn't become vaporware/not deliver on stated promises: in that case their FAQ states that project backers do have legal recourse they can take against the creator.

daverhodusMarch 25, 2013

If anyone wants to check out "Shinen The Wanderer" it's really Shiren.

oksodaScott Thompson, Associate EditorMarch 26, 2013

Quote from: Fjurbanski

Here's what I would like to see. If this subject is so important (which it is), then I'd like to see sites like NWR and podcasts like this to do more than just have one podcast about Sarkeesian and what she thinks about sexism in games. Do more of your own segments. Have women on the podcasts more often, and not just when you're talking about sexism. Is that not in its own way slightly sexist? We (the site and the commenters) should be more proactive in this discussion on our own, rather than just talking about someone talking about it.

Well hopefully this can be a jumping off point for more discussion about the themes of games and their reflection of our culture as whole, concerning a number of social issues or ideologies, not just sexism in games. This has started a great conversation here, and knowing that everyone is open to the idea of discussing challenging issues in a productive and open-minded way encourages me, and I'm sure the rest of the staff, to do more segments like this.

martyMarch 28, 2013

interesting episode.


I don't have anything against FemFreq or what Anita is doing but I'm kind of disappointed that she doesn't offer anything other than criticism or praise.  I think learning how to make and distribute games that hold the values she espouses would be a far more effective way to change the gaming landscape than just teeing off on problems.

ejamerMarch 28, 2013

Quote from: marty

interesting episode.


I don't have anything against FemFreq or what Anita is doing but I'm kind of disappointed that she doesn't offer anything other than criticism or praise.  I think learning how to make and distribute games that hold the values she espouses would be a far more effective way to change the gaming landscape than just teeing off on problems.

From the sound of it, maybe some of the future videos will do this?  It's a valid point though.

Do_WhatApril 03, 2013

I find it interesting how quickly discussions like this are quickly and effortlessly derailed from the topic. Instead of discussions of sexism in games, in this case, or racism or homophobia or other topics along those lines we will jump to all the things surrounding it. We'll talk about who's talking about it, we'll talk about the platform they're using, how anyone could do a better job, how it's not enough, how it's too much, and somehow avoid completely the topic at hand. That's just something to think about. Both in the podcast and in this thread there isn't a lot of discussion of sexism in games.
And I have a major gripe with the podcast talking about being disappointed the comments were turned off. People aren't just making jokes about sandwiches and kitchens. She received hundreds of rape and death threats. You guys just kept talking about the comments and such like people were only doing playful ribbing and that is just not the case. There would be no discussion on the youtube page, it would just be an endless barrage of rape threats. It happens all the time. Whenever people choose to talk up about these sorts of topics large groups of other people respond, not with jokes, but with violent threats, and it's perfectly reasonable for someone to not want to deal with that all day every day of their life.
It's also trivializing to continue to talk about how small a percentage of people do this sort of thing, when it's actually a part of video gaming culture. The people on the podcast talked at length about how defensive they were at things that aren't even slights. When you have that attitude already you're not going to be a part of anything that gets people to stop issuing rape threats over this kind of stuff. So while not everyone is being that vile, we're all a part of a community that encourages it. We dismiss it as not being a lot of people, we dismiss it as not being that bad, we say people should be forced to deal with it and when confronted about our hobby we get defensive and wont' deal with criticism and that sort of silence works right in conjunction with the not as few people as you want to think who are doing a lot more than just telling her to get back in the kitchen.

Quote from: Do_What

I find it interesting how quickly discussions like this are quickly and effortlessly derailed from the topic. Instead of discussions of sexism in games, in this case, or racism or homophobia or other topics along those lines we will jump to all the things surrounding it. We'll talk about who's talking about it, we'll talk about the platform they're using, how anyone could do a better job, how it's not enough, how it's too much, and somehow avoid completely the topic at hand. That's just something to think about. Both in the podcast and in this thread there isn't a lot of discussion of sexism in games.

First of all, I'm delighted that you're here talking about this with us! You could've easily had these thoughts in private, but sharing them publicly allows just the sort of community awareness and discussion that I think we all want.

As to avoiding the larger direct topic of sexism in videogames, game culture, and game industry, I'd like to say that that was perhaps intentional and I am to blame for that. I wanted this segment to have time to address the actual video that Sarkeesian prepared, so I advised the participants beforehand to try to focus on things in Sarkeesian's actual work that they responded to.

I suggested this format because I, like you, was tired of distractions: but I was tired of all the larger topics drowning out the actual things Sarkeesian was saying in the video. I To be fair, I tried to start off the segment by talking about the context of the work, but I saw this as a segment focused on what Sarkeesian was actually objectively saying, not about all the other things that tended to distract from her actual work, and I'd like to think that once we started talking about the video itself that's what it was.

Perhaps it'd be possible for you to categorize this smaller focus as a missed opportunity instead of an effort to avoid discourse? What would you like to see specifically addressed in possible future segments? I'm eagerly hoping we can return to this discussion as Sarkeesian releases more videos.

Quote from: Do_What

And I have a major gripe with the podcast talking about being disappointed the comments were turned off. People aren't just making jokes about sandwiches and kitchens. She received hundreds of rape and death threats. You guys just kept talking about the comments and such like people were only doing playful ribbing and that is just not the case. There would be no discussion on the youtube page, it would just be an endless barrage of rape threats. It happens all the time. Whenever people choose to talk up about these sorts of topics large groups of other people respond, not with jokes, but with violent threats, and it's perfectly reasonable for someone to not want to deal with that all day every day of their life.

In our defense, I think that we did all acknowledge that having the comments turned off was a good move based on what the internet was capable of. If I said things that made it seem as if I was belittling the problems she was facing, I hope you accept my apology.

Would it be fair to say that you feel that when I generally describe the backlash as "degrade, discourage, and discredit", but fail to go into specifics, that I don't convey the enormity of the reaction? Would you consider my attempt to put things "politely" a form of white-washing?

Quote from: Do_What

It's also trivializing to continue to talk about how small a percentage of people do this sort of thing, when it's actually a part of video gaming culture.

I'll have to re-listen to the podcast, but I don't think I remember anyone saying that this was just a small part of the gaming population that did this?

Quote from: Do_What

The people on the podcast talked at length about how defensive they were at things that aren't even slights. When you have that attitude already you're not going to be a part of anything that gets people to stop issuing rape threats over this kind of stuff. So while not everyone is being that vile, we're all a part of a community that encourages it. We dismiss it as not being a lot of people, we dismiss it as not being that bad, we say people should be forced to deal with it and when confronted about our hobby we get defensive and wont' deal with criticism and that sort of silence works right in conjunction with the not as few people as you want to think who are doing a lot more than just telling her to get back in the kitchen.

I personally am of the opinion that changing these sorts of attitudes involves acknowledging, airing, and discussing our different viewpoints and emotional reactions, including where we feel sensitive and defensive. I think having a safe place to discuss those sorts of things will encourage understanding on both sides of the issue, for both the people Sarkeesian's videos are targeted to as well as those trying to create similar works.

I agree with you that the larger issue of sexism extends to some endemic problems in gaming communities. During the video, I even briefly mention other surrounding topics, like the #1ReasonWhy Twitter campaign (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/29/1reasonwhy-reveals-sexism-gaming-industry_n_2205204.html) and sexual harassment at a fighting game tournament (http://www.destructoid.com/sexual-harassment-and-fightin-drama-together-at-last--222877.phtml).

Honestly speaking, that sort of larger topic is one I'm very interested in exploring, even if for this segment I constrained my focus to Sarkeesian's video.

Do_What, I hope you believe that we honestly didn't intend to diminish or avoid a lot of the issues of sexism in videogames. I hope you believe that we tried to approach this discussion in an open and even-handed manner.

That said, I am also interested in hearing your criticism: where do you think we fell short with this discussion? What topics are you interested in seeing addressed if we do another one like this in the future?

Do_WhatApril 03, 2013

I'll post more later, just wanted to say I don't think you were diminishing it on purpose. Not at all. rereading what I wrote, it sounds harsher than I intended. My apologies on that.

Got a news tip? Send it in!
Advertisement
Advertisement