Is the women in games debate good or bad for women in games?

Her work is in the area of gender equality. Of course she is going to tweet about the lack of female characters on the Microsoft presentation. Why not? It's called Feminist Frequency, not Consumer Frequency. That's her area of study.

The article is not wrong:

That's all she did. Just an observation.

Why do you feel so strongly that she should have complained about something else?

 

I know this is an old comment, but if that was true, then why is it called 'feminism'? Why aren't feminists demanding equal time for the same crimes in which men get more jail time on average? Or equal reproductive rights/choices for men? Or equal military standards/drafting? Or equal liability in DV cases? Or equal treatment for men in child custody? Or equal justice in paternity fraud (which is 30% in the US alone)? And so forth, and so forth... the point is that they fight for their own interests, not anyone else's. That's like saying the black rights movement fought for the rights of white people too, no because it's beyond the scope of the movement. Hence the reason it's aptly named.

+1. Feminists especially.

Indeed. It's quotes like these that give me a little more hope that not all is lost here.

"The nuclear family must be destroyed... Whatever its ultimate meaning, the break-up of families now is an objectively revolutionary process." -- Linda Gordon

 

Gay people already have equality? Yeah right...that's why they can't get married in so many countries, and probably never will in the United States of America where "all men are created equal".

 

Marriage aside, they indeed have equality for the most part and political correctness is all any oppressed group needs to beat anyone with an opposing viewport into submission. As far as marriage goes, they should come up with something better than marriage because marriage for straight people is bad enough, especially the laws behind it. There's lots of injustices from many angles, but complaining or whining never changes anything like most of the so called "activist" groups do these days. I'm a minority, and I know what it's like to be discriminated against (and yes, I have experienced it) but I don't go chanting "the white man has got me down". I get called a nigger frequently like it's a joke, but I don't care. It's those who persevere and overcome that I respect, not those who bitch until this is changed and political correctness forces me to accept <insert notion here> whether I agree with it or not. I mean seriously, for the love of God, it's politically incorrect to say that white men are discriminated against even when they are!

And as for the statement "all men are created equal" has been a dammed lie in the US ever since it began. Not even all people are treated the same, regardless or race, gender, sexual orientation, religion etc. Never have, never will. The balance of equality simply just shifts a bit in another direction every few generations or so.

 

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism

 

Are you seriously quoting WIKIPEDIA of all sources?? Even more so, taking it seriously? -_-

For starters, those two statements completely contradict each other...

 

Indeed. My reaction to a girl in a multiplayer match was excitement. Never had a problem with them in gaming at all.

And as far as game industry jobs go, in my experience they don't get discriminated against in general and any form of 'discrimination' they receive is rare. In fact, they often get special treatment from co-workers, which doesn't really bother me except when they get promoted because of their gender (which has happened in my career).

 

There is a problem, but this isn't it. This statement is pure flame bait (look at what it did here), and shame on you for getting trolled.

Ragging on an incredibly small sample size of games proves/means nothing. And to be honest, I wouldn't even want to be associated with that press conference anyway...

Of course, controversy creates cash. That leads to misleading tweets like the one where she stresses it's been 25 years since Peach has been playable in a "core" Super Mario Bros. game. This is a true statement but there have been a whooping 5 other "core" games in this past 25 years (a tiny sample of games), some of which are rehashes/remakes anyway.
Then there's the factually incorrect tweets like where she claims that Dragon Age: Inquisition was the first trailer to feature a female protagonist, however, Lightning Returns was shown before that during the MS conference. She was clearly watching the MS presser...

I'm glad to see she actually celebrated Mirror's Edge 2. Remember: the carrot works better than the stick. The way to fix this problem is to encourage and promote good games, not by shaming gamers and developers.

She has a very captive, wealthy and active audience. She can help create a positive change, if she wants to.

 

What contradiction? What source do you recommend?

 

So what should they do? Was the civil rights movement "complaining or whining" too?

Yep...all men are equal, except for Native Americans who can be genocided and/or driven from their lands for profit, and black people who can be used as slave labor (no contradiction there or anything!), and these days anyone who's "suspected" of being a "terrorist" can be thrown in a prison camp whether there's any proof or not.

 

The Telegraph wonders: Are computer games being taken over by women?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/10086627/Are-computer-games-being-taken-over-by-women.html?fb

 

welcome to the world of the internet! or the world in general.

there's the problem

as for the lust objects, thats only natural females will always be "lust objects" to straight males as a basic rule. that's not to say all are.

games are fantasy not real life representation if they want to change it, they need to create and help develop characters and games and stories and art etc.
get involved!

 

I'm of the opinion real Feminists don't care about what goes on in video games. They're too busy worrying about Salary equality and how women in the middle east and Muslim countries are treated like cattle. You know real problems that need real answers.

 

Well, the first statement clearly states that feminism is about equal rights for women, then goes on to say that it's about gender equality. Equal rights for one group does not necessarily mean equality for everyone, and the minority rights movement in the US during the mid-20th century is a good example. As I stated before, if it was about equality for everyone, then it wouldn't be called feminism.

The reason I don't recommend wikipedia is simply because it's a wiki, meaning anyone with something to say can edit/change the article to their liking regardless of whether they have factual evidence or logical cause to do so or not. Since it's virtually impossible to get an unbiased view, there's no way I can take it seriously. Another example, [not saying I do or don't believe in this] but let's say that I wanted to look up material based on conspiracy theories, the illuminati or the Jesuit order in the Catholic Church. On wikipedia, it's all to easy to misrepresent one person's side of the story. This is why I prefer to read one person's side of the story without mixture or commentary, and read the opposing person's view after that and weigh the validity of both on my own discretion.

Overall, rather than totally depending on what was written, I examine the actions as well as words, but I take actions more seriously. And feminism's actions contradict their words all too often. Furthermore, many of their so called "statistics" are often exaggerated or misrepresented to further their cause. The pay-gap is probably the biggest one aside from rape culture. It's devolved into "men are this and that... down with patriarchy!" while silencing anyone who dares resist or bring up an alternative viewport by labeling it as hate speech. Hate speech is okay, as long as it's in their favour. Let's take a look at facebook. If a woman makes a rant about men, nothing happens. If a man debunks a myth about gender equality, it's considered hate speech and is taken down. I hate facebook with a passion, nor do I really use it (my cousin nagged me into getting it). Tumblr is even worse, but afaik, nothing gets taken down or removed. What's wrong with being equally capable of free thought or free expression? Like I always say, actions speak louder than words. To say one thing, and do the other makes one a hypocrite, and this is just one reason why I'm not a feminist.

To a certain degree, sometimes, yes. When you have virtually no rights for an extended period of time, then it's time to grab your signs and start rioting, or get your pitch forks, torches and form your lynch mob, which ever is more appropriate. When you already have "rights and privileges" as well as political correctness on your side, there's no need to moan and gripe about every little thing you personally see as 'injustice'. I don't see myself as privileged, but as a minority I can use political correctness to my advantage, but such power can be better devoted to other things.

If a series of injustices against a certain group goes continuously unaddressed purposely, then it might be a good time to start rioting until that's changed because it will eventually snowball into something huge. I've had cops stop me and ask me what I'm doing because I'm a "suspicious looking person" walking somewhere at 5am-ish multiple times (because I'm a minority probably), but I don't care to make a federal case about it! In that same city, I've had people yell all sorts of things at me, things they'd never yell to a white person. It's not hurting me, so I keep walking.

 

well they should keep their noses out of other countries culture, customs and ways. personally i think younger males have it alot worse than their female peers

edit: oh and

yes i does, Equality means just that EQUAL one side cannot be better or worse off than the other, or it is not equality. but supremacy.

 

I respectfully disagree. First, you might want to be aware of how that argument is flawed on a logical level: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

Second, on a practical level, a lot of feminists exist. Enough to be fighting the battles they individually care about & have influence over. Someone who built an Internet following by pointing out pop culture references to degraded women certainly has the influence to change how people view and create pop culture. This same person probably has no influence over corporate pay structure or what people are doing half a world away. This same person knows that other, more qualified people are fighting that fight.

Also, there is nothing wrong with taking a grassroots approach to feminism. If videogames can show people that women are more than just the foil in a man's world, and then those people fail to see any reason to discriminate against women in other aspects of their lives because of this, then, hey, feminism achieved (tm).

After raising $160k on Kickstarter, the person who made the tweet that started this back up again has ironically slowed down the action she was taking. She was making 5+ youtube videos per year (for free?), but in the year since she actually raised some money, she's only made 2/3 (two-thirds!) of the 12 videos that were funded with the Kickstarter campaign.

In the past year, that money could have been used to make games (or actually delivering the videos).

 

I rather use written sources. More reliable than anecdotes, since personal stories can be biased or changed to suit an agenda very easily, while material con public places can be subjected to public scrutiny.

I agree on this part with synrgy87 on his response:

 

I agree with the bolded statement because 1st world problems are minuscule compared to those of 3rd world inequalities, but there's a series of logical explanations that has debunked the pay gap myth time and time again.

For starters, if women were paid 70 something cents for every dollar a man makes, why hire men for anything? It would be economically unfeasible and fiscally irresponsible to pay someone more for the same work as another who is already being paid less. Big corporations are always in favour of cheaper labour and dealing abroad for it, such as outsourcing jobs to 3rd world countries, Mexico and China. Second, it's a thoroughly researched fact that women are less likely to work overtime, take time off and call in sick twice as much as men do. So those who work less will obviously get paid less. It's not sexism, it's just common sense. And by no means is it absolutely true, it's only generally true. Oh, and to top it off, it's also a proven fact that unmarried women tend to earn more than unmarried men. Would that be considered sexist?

And you're absolutely right, equality is derived from the word equal. But, it you're fighting for "equality" (or should I say, what would be considered equal) on one side, that does not prove that you are trying to maintain the balance of equality on both sides. That's what I was trying to say. =]

This is where I disagree because simply put, virtually nothing they do has to do with equality, anymore. Saying one thing and doing the other speaks for itself.

But if you prefer written sources rather than real world examples, try reading these (in western culture, much of this has already become manifest): http://antimisandry.com/feminist-misandry/feminist-quotes-20106.html#axzz2TQmABzea

 

but if its equality you are fighting for from the unequal side, you are fighting to equalize the situation which means both sides must be equal for equality to be obtained. in essence if you're fighting for you're side to be equal then you are trying to maintain or achieve equality between the two sides, it's not mutually exclusive (X = Y) if x = 100 and y =90 there is no equality x cannot be equal with itself it can only be equal when compared to another variable or the other side of the equation.