The Game OverThinker Overbytes - DON'T CENSOR ME!!!
Bob talks about the current war on video game censorship and how it isn't the same beast we fought back in the jack Thompson days.
» Show: The Game OverThinker
I find it interesting that clintisiceman here discounts thunderf00t because he is a scientist of the wrong strife. You know that is called? It's called the appeal to authority fallacy. In other words, its not the argument that matters, apparently its the right type of authority that requires he is right or wrong. And yet, this isn't used to highlight why he is wrong, thunderf00t is just wrong because... he's not a sociologist? So his criticism would be valid if he was one then? Also, notice how he doesn't specify which arguments of his of Anita are "idiotic" and doesn't offer any detail of what isn't "correct or..." doesn't "make sense" in thunderf00t's videos. This is the tactic of a propagandist who is not going to debate anything, it is the tactic of someone who comes in to polarize the debate for other readers, not to engage in serious discussion.
If you want to prove me wrong Clint, then you go ahead and start answering some of my questions then, otherwise I find your polarization to be dishonest and completely malintent.
This video is spot-on. Should be required viewing on places like reddit where they just don't understand things like censorship or patriarchy. I love all of the ignorant men's rights activist neckbeards in the comments who were so offended by you laying down basic truths. Some people just need bogeymen to hate. The second anyone on the internet suggests that Anita Sarkeesian isn't some sort of horrible monster who is ruining video games, the gaming community instantly turns into a bunch of stupid babies who just dropped their bottles. I can't believe the mental gymnastics I'm seeing in these comments. When presented with difficult but extremely self-evident truths like "hey, a lot of video games tend to objectify women and/or strip them of agency", these people's brains will make up some crazy bullshit to deny it. Major lols at dudes linking to thunderf00t. Dude is a science guy, not a sociology guy. His opinions on Anita Sarkeesian are idiotic because he has absolutely no idea what he's talking about. You people agree with him because he's saying things that you like, not because he's saying things that are correct or actually make sense. Bob here is clearly well read and knowledgeable, but the shit he's saying makes you upset so you all throw a bunch of ignorant baby tantrums. Unbelievable.
I'm honestly disappointed. Yes I agree that those issues exist, but what about art imitating life. If these issues didn't exist in real life then I'd be pissed, but when the games show what life can often be like then stop hating on the art and worry about the problem its showing.
I think Anita has a point, but she's just fighting it all wrong. The tropes aren't that bad in a story. In real life it matters. Yes princess peach is a damsel in distress. Why is that bad? Its a simple plot point, and it works. They've had mario be captured. they've had both bros been captured ((albeit they gave her a weird moveset)) she was a hero too. Then there was the RPG where she was a playable character. Now she's a playable character again in the modern game.
She's taken because she has political power. The mushroom kingdom is the strongest and best kingdom in that world, and you know who rules it? Peach. Peach is the queen of a glorious empire. So what if she isn't as physically as strong. Thats genetics.
And again what about sexism towards males? We're stuck being muscly brain dead gun toting masogonists. I don't want to be stereotyped as that.
I'm a clever author who is sly and enjoys a good puzzle. Yet when I pick up an RPG ((my favorite genre)) to be an archer or a rouge I have to be a girl because men can only be big buff guys with giant axes and dicks. And why is that because men are typically bigger and stronger.
People need to get over how we are made. There will always be a difference, so if people want to be equal we'd have to give up what makes us separate.
Also I just don't believe in homosexuality. I think its more of a trend than anything. I mean if you're born with it how do you get it since genetics requires reproduction, and you need a guy and a girl for that.
Why must you use your extreme left wing political views so much Bob? Yes, equating criticism with censorship is an issue. Yes, the portrayal of women in particular is not optimal. But to then go on a rant that HURR HURR FEMINISM GOOD HOMOSEXUALITY GOOD MUSLIMS GOOD WAR BAD? Sad.
i considered it , then i watched someone with actually knowledge and reasoning explain/demonstrate how everything being complained about there is all nonsense/bullshit , while simultaneously showing massive hypocrisy and just wtf moments coming from the complainers , i wonder if movebob has seen any of thunderfoot's videos on the matter....
nice find , a pretty short cut explanation of this non-problem.....
Tell that to someone who
1) it actually applies to.
I was being plenty polite and respectful before voiceofreason here decided to start lobbing insults
2) Gives a rat's ass, or single fraction of a fuck.
Like I said earlier, the conversation was over a while back. I have no intention of keeping it going. Thought somebody might have been paying attention. My mistake.
I just explained to you, there is NO female objectification in gaming, unless every single male protagonist is male objectification, and every single time a woman looks at man's sexual attractiveness she's objectifying men in a vile, sexist, deeply degrading manner. There is only female objectification without automatically equal or worse male objectification, if you consider men's sexuality vile and harming all women merely with their eyes, even when the one woman he looks at is fake, while women's sexuality is benevolent.
But the fact that you're incapable of even bothering to try and understand it, that you are completely incapable of seeing anything but female victimhood, and instead just spout the same tired bullshit of female objectification, even thought I just showed it doesn't exist with a simple bit of logic, shows your sexism quite nicely.
Newsflash Ferrety75, when the likes of Anita Sarkeesian and other feminists yammer on on how women are being objectified by gamers, they mean YOU. YOU are the bad gamer that objectifies women, you and every other male gamer on the planet. They don't make a distinction, and they don't think you're the one good man they'll flock to; no, you will considered even more dangerous that the other bad men to be destroyed even faster: you are traitor to your fellow men, an a sycophant that every fibre in their being despises. The female objectifying gamer is you. They. Mean. You.
So being against sexism in gaming or against obvious female objectification makes me a man-hater now? I'm a man too you know; I'm just not a fan of obvious negative or harmful gender-based portrayals in gaming, and it's really not balanced on both sides.
Funny, how Magic Mike is heralded as a great step forward; how awesome it is that women get to look at men's bodies in a movie theater, or at home; a movie made where the men are entirely objectified for the sole purpose of titillating women... and it is heralded as good.
But men look at fully clothed fake women, and the objectification is all of a sudden, bad, and disgusting.
It's like men's sexuality is depicted as so vile, that when they merely look at a beautiful woman they are violating her. Yet women's sexuality is looked upon as so benevolent, that when scream and holler like mad women at strippers, and grab them, and touch them and scratch them, and do whatever they come up with it is considered just fine. Indeed, when grown women have sex with underage boys and get themselves pregnant, everyone, especially feminists, those proponents of "objectification of women" say he was lucky guy, and courts make them child support. When women rape men, the victim is called "lucky".
A sexy fake woman in a video game, huh? Any person who thinks that's a problem, is a person burning with hatred for men and their sexuality, and seek to demonize them. These people who think that, that are so hell-bent on harming men, that they seek to end the ability of men to look upon FAKE sexy FULLY CLOTHED woman, are the vile and evil ones.
Men's sexuality, and enjoying the look of a beautiful woman, is as benevolent as women's sexuality; there is not a single bit wrong with it. Men do not objectify, they merely enjoy the view, just like women do.
Fine by me.
Well the issue that some people have with Dragon's Crown is that, regarding the character design, it's seen as involving female objectification. And that kind of is an ongoing gender-based problem in video games, so I can see why some people would see it as an issue. Some people see some of the character designs in Dragon's Crown as being harmless or comedic; some others see it as being inappropriate or offensive.
Guys. That's well enough. As a mod, I am requesting the arguing parties to halt the argument as it will just resort to insults and has gone far enough. Please remember to be respectful to the opposing opinions and not use harsh terms against each other.
How is Anita Sarkeesian a con artist? She posted videos showing relevant examples of negative gender-based tropes in video games, and that makes her a liar and con artist?
I was calling you an asshole by putting to me a position I do not hold. Now that we have that out of the way, no... Feminists say that the gender pay gap exists because of patriarchy. I have seen that the gender pay gap exists for other reasons far more complicated. Such as the fact that women tend to choose social and family over career, that they're prone to take more sick leave in case of family issues, pregnancy, etc... all of these are better explanation than the supposed patriarchy because if you look at the factors, then you find out that the gender pay gap is over exaggerated by feminists. Hence my elusion towards that the gender pay exists but not because of the reasons feminists think, but of the reasons reality says. If you still don't get it, then I can't help you.
Option B then. Cool.
And another irrelevant and unnecessary history lesson. Look, buddy, calm down for a second, and listen:
First off, You say that there is a wage gap-- exactly what feminists love to preach. I say "No there isn't. It's been debunked". You counter by stepping in saying and saying, "Nuh uh! It does too exist, and that word doesn't mean what you think it means." , and I prove you wrong.
Calling me stupid, and an asshole makes you look like a really poor sport. Not to mention petty, and a little childish-- especially considering that I haven't once insulted you, so there would be no call for such an ill-mannered response. But as you say "stupid people are abound on the internet."
There, now you have something to bitch about.
Oh look, another asshole who thinks that because I take a more cautious approach to my stances, I must be of position x instead of just asking me. For the record, I am not a feminist and that being said, I was never offended by what you said but I am clearly being offended at you assuming a position that I do not hold (e.g. feminism). You think that by me stating, "the patriarchy as is espoused by feminism and how they use it to sugar coat their view of history; like saying that the point of women being married to a man in medieval times was just to babysit the children without ever taking into account how it would have been for both parents to even raise a child of both were working, and let's not forget that people during that time didn't just have one child, they had several because of a lack of medicine available to everyone would cause children to get sick and die pretty easily" and "there is another alternative explanation which best explains the wage gap much more than a system of men having power over women in the work place" would indicate that I am not a feminist. But then again, stupid people are abound on the internet.
First off, I'm ever so sorry that your impromptu history lesson, and feminist claptrap recital was tedious to read through, and veered off-topic. I'm even more sorry that you obviously feel offended that I pointed it out, and have resorted to telling me to shut up-- even though you're on a public forum, and therefore open yourself up for all kinds of commentary.
Debunked (adj) : To be proven false, or exaggerated
^ This is the official Merriam Webster definition of the word, mind you.
Like I said, women getting paid less than men is false, a lie, fabricated, fake, not true. It's been proven so, therefore: Debunked.
To further hammer the point home, I'm going to give you a good example of the definition at work:
I have proven to you there's nothing "alternate" about my interpretation of the word, or how it applies to the subject at hand. Hence, your statement has been *debunked*.
Your options are as follows
A) You can concede defeat, we can shake hands, and nobody leaves the discussion with hurt feelings.
B) You can keep arguing despite having been proven wrong, and make yourself look stupid.
I pray you make the right choice.
If I want a clarification on what he meant, I can get it from the person who made the comment regarding patriarchy, not by some other third person's interpretation.
And again, using the term debunked to describe something is both irresponsible when you're conveying alternative explanations.
I agree with you but if that's all patriarchy means they should get a better label because I needed that cleared up for me.