So I found the meme above on a Facebook page called “Feminist Hypocrisy.”
I also found this familiar pic posted there as well.
And this highly edifying discussion underneath it:
Huh. I’m seeing some hypocrisy here, but it doesn’t look much like feminist hypocrisy.
@lith:
That’s it, as far as I’m aware. In fact, that’s the issue with almost all of media. Practically every story with some merit to it should be considered acceptable, but if only one type of story is repeated over and over to the exclusion of others, it’s going to start looking problematic.
There’s a challenge going on for people to read only non-white-male authors for a year. It’s not that white-male authors are bad, or that their stories can’t be interesting or damn good, it’s that their perspective has been the only one that’s really been available. We need to highlight other voices for a while to balance things out.
Then, when non-white-male authors aren’t a favored category, their voices will just be one part of the crowd, and they will no longer be considered problematic.
Taruhi,
Oh, do elaborate. Shower us with your wisdom.
Cthulhu’s Intern,
Astonishing how blatantly they’ll lie. They can make up anything they like because it does not matter what claims they make or if they’re true. These men are determined to terrorize this woman until she shuts up, changes her name and goes into hiding. They’re doing it because they can abuse a woman safely behind rape culture, anonymity and a mob of other abusers. This delights them. They are hateful, vicious cowards. The internet has given abusive misogynists a leg up. They can terrorize several targets in packs and face no repercussions. It’s efficient. It’s ideal. They won’t stop until they have to because they are having more fun than they have ever had in their lives. These men (and some women) are living their dream. That’s who ‘gaters are.
Is this thread going to become about criticizing the woman being terrorized and lied about?
So what? She didn’t show us a story about a vulnerable or victimized man either. An example is just that, *an* example, as in just one. It’s not a template to be used to crank out feminist-acceptable video games, for dog’s sake.
Why should Anita Sarkeesian have to churn out example after example until you agree with one? Doing so would get to be beside the point of her critique really quickly.
Maybe it’s because I’m an academic, but I really like Sarkeesian’s work. It’s very scholarly and very much in line with what I do, which is read books and watch films and comment on them.
The good thing about scholarly work is that there can be room fro debate and discussion. Unfortunately, most people just want to call her a bitch or other smear and threaten her life. Most of the negative comments I’ve read seem to miss the point. They really don’t want to engage in a discussion, they want to silence her.
One of the things I really appreciate that she said is that it is possible to enjoy and even like stories, games, movies, etc even when we find problems with some aspect. She didn’t say down with all video games until they are like I want!
Also, I agree with Hambeast – she’s just giving one example, and why should she have to satisfy anyone’s ideas of what she “should” do? And perhaps she didn’t give an example of a story about a vulnerable of victimized woman because part of her point is that there are plenty out there. What she seems to be advocating is more and more diverse roles for women and in games where there is the option of a woman character that the story not revolve around the fantasies of cis-het males (like having a woman give you a lap dance or watching a pole dancer).
Further, I think her point that a lot of the details (like strippers, pole dancers, prostitutes as well as the drug dealers and other assortment of underworld types) is a cheap way to be “edgy” without having to think too much. I don’t know about other people around here, but I do find there is a LOT of really lazy writing and character building in movies, shows, books, games, everywhere!
I also like Sarkeesian’s work, even though there’s one or two pretty minor points in the tropes series I considered stretching the point. But it wasn’t actually wrong and I agree with everything else she had to say, definitely a worthwhile series.
I agree about the not wanting to engage in discussion, every time she says anything they either harass her or use the old, “men have that problem too!” thing to shut down the conversation (and not because they’re in any way interested in fixing it).
@scarletathena:
Orion, first you complained that she expects media to conform to a narrow vision, then you complained that she pitched a piece of media that didn’t conform to your narrow vision.
I am squinting at you in an unimpressed fashion.
I’ve noticed that when feminists/allies criticize the things Anita Sarkeesian says in her videos, it’s almost always men.
I think it’s all about defensiveness. Even men who are generally well meaning don’t always want to hear that the things they like are problematic.
I’m also not sure why this has turned into a conversation about nitpicking a harassment victim.
Yeah, you’d think that if there was one time when you might choose to overlook whatever minor disagreements you have with someone’s arguments…
Sometimes it seems like people are trying to prove something about themselves. You know, “I’m cool, I’m not part of a hive mind, I’m not afraid to criticize Anita Sarkeesian!”
I guess my issues are not really criticisms or disagreements with Anita. They’re more thinking through stuff. But yeah, the GamerGaters pretty much poisoned the well on the possibility of having a respectful discussion.
“And a nice shower”, says the guy with two biblical, Jewish first names. About a woman who isn’t Jewish.
And this is NOT harassment, but “legitimate criticism”?
@lbt
Who said that? I was referring to the four or five guys specifically that seem to be in that group, not in general. As for your question: At least two. Harassment is the act of repeatedly harassing, pestering, troubling, or disturbing. However, what they’re doing is talking behind closed doors. It’s like teenage girls gossiping at the mall to each other. Just as immature as well.
@Andiexist
Well, yeah. I never said they weren’t being horrible. In fact, I pretty clear I explicitly said they’re being assholes. But that’s all they’re being. They’re acting like immature 5 year olds with basic knowledge of general history. They’re neither harassers or critics. Just assholes. Scummy, scummy little assholes.
@Lea
Are you sure you’re responding to me? O.o What’s to elaborate on with any level of wisdom in my comment? It’s a pretty basic comment.
“She’s done such a good job, she deserves a golden star.”
“And a nice shower.”
Treating this as an anti-semitic exchange requires
(1) they are aware of the anti-semitic origin of the cartoons
(2) they are probably aware of the Nazi requirement that Jews wear a yellow star of David
(3) they are aware of the fact that the Nazi gas chambers were disguised as showers.
Now it is quite possible that this interpretation is correct. But there is another possibility — that the second guy is picking up on “golden star” and suggesting that she should have a “golden shower”, that someone should piss on her. This would be a less disturbing interpretation only because almost anything is better than Nazism.
I completely understand why some feel it’s inappropriate to discuss her videos in this thread. If the consensus is not to do that, I’ll abide by it. These are opinions I’ve held for several years now, and unfortunately it doesn’t seem likely that her harassment will stop any time soon, so I stopped waiting for that, but I can see that it still might be better to share my opinion on her videos on a site or thread that was about gaming rather than about harassment.
Yes, I understand that this is her primary project. It’s important work and she’s doing it well. I wouldn’t describe it as a critical project, myself. There are bits here and there in her videos in which she starts to develop a theory or at least a definition of what “feminist art” would look like and how it would function. That’s what I mean when I discuss her “critical project,” and that’s what I’m taking issue with.
@Hambeast, So what? She didn’t show us a story about a vulnerable or victimized man either.She did 3 actually; Primal, Beyond Good and Evil, and Aquaria. In that same section she goes on to say something I find really interesting.
What I think she’s saying here is that, even without considering gender, making one character helpless and 2-dimensional just to motivate another character makes for bad art, and it’s best to try to give some dignity and humanity to all our characters. I agree with this completely That’s why I found Legend of the Last Princess disappointing. If a good developer made it, it might be an awesome game; I loved transistor, septerra core, mirror’s edge, and so on. It’s a disappointing non-answer to the challenge she set herself in this video.
@shalimar, I’m really not crying for lack of misogynistic games to buy. Here, let me pitch you a game and see if that can explain what I’m getting at.
In Hostage, you play a young member of a royal family who has been captured and held as a political prisoner. If the game has a fixed protagonist, she’s a woman. If the game supports character creation, then the player can choose gender. All the game play takes place in the one room you’re held in. Each day you receive letters, then check out your windows and look for clues, then write letters, then click the bed to go to sleep. You can send letters to your family, to royalty in other kingdoms, to members of your captors’ alliance you think you can flip, or to personal friends and secret allies. However, the default messenger won’t deliver to all of these recipients, and will censor the content of your messages. Sometimes you’ll get the opportunity to use a special courier like a sympathetic member of your captors’ family, a double-agent who infiltrated your enemies, or a thief who can sneak in at night to pick up letters. These courier can send you letters more places with less oversight. There are 2 “good” endings, in which either your captors release you or you are rescued by your family’s army; 2 “bad” endings, in which you are executed or make the political marriage your captors want you to, and 2 “mixed” endings, in which you are either rescued in a “dishonorable” night raid which angers your family’s allies and extends the war, or you are ransomed at ruinous expense. Optional romance subplots allow you to get with the thief who delivers your secret letters at night, the princess of a neighboring country you know only from her letters, the servant who cleans your room and delivers your meals, or a member of the family that capture you who is opposed to the war and argues for your release.
Grumpy – I totally missed the golden star/ star of David, and I did think of the shower being a golden one. But unfortunately what you describe about the Nazi’s does sound sickeningly possible.
I think it is likely that they are quite happy for it to be taken all the ways you describe. Surely they are totally aware of the anti semitism?
Um, dude? (I’m assuming you’re a dude.) There is a huge difference between generic jerkery and saying someone should be a victim of genocide. I am quite suspicious of your seeming inability to grasp this. Given you almost certainly aren’t here in good faith… but here’s a breakdown anyway.
Horribleness beyond generic jerkery going on here:
1. Racism (obvious.)
2. Trivialization (because incredibly horrible times in human history are not things you casually insult people with.)
3. Advocacy of torture (should also be obvious.)
As someone pointed out earlier, they’re using a cartoon of a fascist hand symbol. It was definitely intended as a holocaust joke.
And to the person who compared it to girls gossiping, no. Just, no. I did my share of hanging out at the mall and gossiping as a teenager and we would have never dreamed of talking like that. Making a catty comment about someone’s outfit is not the equivalent of wishing someone was a genocide victim.
@Andiexist Okay. To avoid a further game of semantics and assuming on your part, let me go ahead and clarify for clarity’s sake.
THE GUYS IN THIS POST SAID HORRIBLE, DISGUSTING THINGS PEOPLE SHOULD NOT SAY. Okay? Are we clear here? An easy word for me to use is “asshole”. It might not be entirely accurate, but hey. I’m pretty sure we can all agree that these guys are pretty scummy. Yes? Is there anyone in contention to the fact that these guys are horrible? I don’t think so. If so, you’d have to have some pretty heavy justifications that I don’t believe they have. Period.
Have a sufficiently elaborated now?
Taruhi | March 7, 2015 at 6:49 pm
I think the bolded is the bit that andiexist raised an eyebrow at, and I assure you, I’m doing the same.
They are harassers. They’re actively harassing someone. By definition. They are sending continuous hate at Anita Sarkeesian because they don’t like her. They won’t leave her be, and they’re trying to bully her into silence.
What you seem to be doing is minimizing the issue and saying “it’s just assholes acting like assholes!” which is a very similar statement to “boys will be boys”. You’re essentially saying “well, they’re assholes, so what did you expect?”, and giving them an out for their shitty behavior, regardless of if you condemn it or not.
No one said you agreed with them, only that you’re trying to brush it off as Not A Big Deal, when it is very much A Big Deal.
Okay, so you’re taking issue with something that isn’t her main point and that she hasn’t addressed directly or fleshed out in a comprehensive manner.
That does not make much sense to me. She’s just mentioning bits and aspects of what feminist art might mean; she could have a comprehensive theory that totally encompasses everything you want it to include. Or that makes a really airtight case for why it shouldn’t include those things. Or, for that matter, maybe she just hasn’t thought about it that hard because it’s not her point and it’s not the thing she wants to argue about.
@ParadoxicalIntent
But that’s the thing! They aren’t sending Anita anything. They’re, in fact, doing the opposite. They are purposefully discussing their hate between themselves, in a sectioned off group that Anita would NEVER go to. They are keeping their hate away from her in very sick, very cruel jokes. Unless, of course, you were to suggest that Anita is a follower of “Feminist Hypocrisy” fan page on Facebook. Which is why I claimed they weren’t harassing her. They are, by definition, doing nothing of the sort.
Since you insist on making teen girl gossiping as an analogy, do you think gossiping behind someone’s back and secret sharing isn’t used as a form of harassment and bullying? Because it very much is.
This isn’t in secret or in private. It’s on the web, which is a rather public and easily-searchable place.
One of the most irritating “criticisms” of Sarkeesian I see is this tendency to take what she’s said so far as the sum total of all she could ever say, or will ever say, about video games, or feminism, or the portrayal of women in media. First this is irksome to me because she’s less than halfway thru her planned series, and a lot of the “but what about X!!!” objections I see assume that she will never get to “X”, even when X has been in the list of proposed topics since she launched her Kickstarter. But it is even more irksome to me because it is so extremely uncharitable about her points and intentions. Since she hasn’t said *absolutely everything* about a topic, or elided some nuance, or summarized a minor point, she is, according to her “critics” in the least hysterical phrasing, “ignorant about games!” and in the worst, most common, “A LIAR!”
The best example of this is the endless hue-and-cry about the use of Hitman footage during her discussion of violence against female NPCs (who just happen to usually be sex workers.) It is clear to anyone who isn’t going over her work with a fine-toothed misandry-calibrated comb that she is using this footage to elucidate her point about this trope in games *in general*, not singling out Hitman in particular. Another is the chronic nitpick about Crystal of Dinosaur Planet always being planned as ONE of TWO playable characters, so it wasn’t HER GAME at all! Checkmate feminists. Thus completely missing the forest for the trees, as yet another potentially interesting and independent female character is de-powered and sexualized to further a narrative solely built on a male protagonist.