Tropes vs Women

Because archetypes are fun.

And if they (femin-nazis) don't like them, there's the OTHER archetype, laura croft, who will shoot your dick off.

 

Wow. In one paragraph, you bring up other threads, and then tell me to stay on topic. Of course, that means that I can't reasonably respond to what you've said. All I will say is that if you look at my posts more carefully, you will see discussion of possible solutions. But the first step of discussing a problem is recognizing that it is indeed a problem. I get a lot of push back, so there's a lot of demonstrating the validity of my initial point before I can go on.

If you think that I come off as a sour puss, how do you think you're doing right now?

Thanks for the English lesson. I'm always getting those two confused. You should be more polite about it next time. Don't want to get a stern warning from Aerianne, do you?

Er, you only asked one question. Learn the English language and don't pluralize singular nouns! Hehe, just joshing you. I didn't answer your question because I wasn't responding to your post. Question answered in post number 38.

 

I do.

theres some truth to the idea that most, if not all, characters within a narrative are archetypes to one degree or another. you can always reduce a story down to narrative elements, like the Russian formalists, (i prefer the structuralist approach myself) however, what becomes clear in terms of general narrative trends within cinema, is that if this really is the case, then, compared to women, men have a HUGE repertoire of archetypes to which they can correspond, to the extent that it hardly seems that they are being constricted by their roles at all, and we generally have no expectations of what their characters will be like based solely on their race, gender, class etc in the way that we can have for those who fall outside of the privileged traits. in any old movie,(and very often in contemporary mainstream cinema as well) the characterisation of the male protagonist takes place through action and dialogue, whereas the female's entire character is summed up in her appearance- what she is, not what she does, the appearance of femininity becomes a shorthand for a set of values which the audience instantly assumes that she embodies (and, of course, she does.)

figures who fall outside of the traits, in contrast to male white rich people have a very small number of archetypes to draw on, archetypes which are always: marginalised within the narrative*, defined only in relation to maleness/whiteness/richness, are defined only in relation to the protagonist, often negative, lack narrative agency, autonomy, personality, are entirely passive or antagonistic.

female characters had to basically wait up until the 1940's before a new stereotype was created for them in mainstream cinema which carried with it even the faintest whiff of personal and sexual narrative agency, and this, as critics point out, always resulted in the re-imposition of masculine authority within the narrative at the hands of the male protagonist (a resolution brought about by a bullet or a marriage )

*in the case of race, this is incredibly prominent, in american cinema right up until the mid 20th century, black characters HAD to have roles which made no impact on the narrative and only featured them in inclosed scenes, so that the scenes could be removed for theatrical exhibition in some southern states, without affecting the plot- watch any 1940's film scene set in a train station and look in the background, black actors playing porters will be ducking behind white actors in the foreground, so as to minimise their presence as much as possible- these rules meant that they were almost always relegated to being comic relief, many contemporary critics see the "funny ethnic sidekick" stereotype we still sometimes see as owing itself to the legacy of this period.

 

Anything they wish to discuss amongst themselves without having men present is the real answer. I have somewhere to be tonight, but to be specific about a couple of quick issues, there's recovery from rape and female biological issues (not sure why you'd think it was necessary to have men present in the discussion of menstruation).

 

Tsk tsk. Disrespecting moderators in a No-No.

 

Those who are all "DAWW THE POOR MENS" in here are completely missing the point of this.

Men have tropes in video games. Yes, but do they demean men in the same way that the vast majority of female tropes do for women? Females in video games are generally reduced to sex objects, eye candy, damsels who need saving, etc. That's the whole point of this person's series of "tropes v. Women" videos. It's showcasing the tropes and discussing the negative impact they have in regards to how women are viewed and treated. And the way that most males who play video games treat women who also play is downright disgusting.

Someone mentioned Lara Croft earlier and I think that's a bad example. Yeah, she might shoot your dick off, but the first and last thing you'll think about her is "Beautiful woman, big tits.. where's a mod that can make it so I can play as her naked?"

 

To address feminine issues while ignoring the male does not imply inaccuracy or unfairness or irrelivance or bias.

"bias" implies that feminine and male are in opposition and that favoring one is rejecting the other.

If one speaks only of olives, is one being biased or unfair to grapes?

 

I think it's clear that you don't play video games.

The model skins are a gimmick, and a nice one. But if you're playing the game it's not what you're thinking about. You're not playing tomb raider constantly thinking about laura croft, that would be really boring.... don't you people have porn? Because gamers sure do, and they're not about to sully their games, which they tend to take seriously, in that sort of way.

If women want to be influencing the archetypes of main characters, there's one answer: play video games. Males tend to play video games while females tend to make fun of males or bitch about it (depending on their age, and often both). So females have little influence on games. It's another instance of the sexes being different, and feminists screaming, about things caused by their own differences.

Ironically, I read an essay on why girls don't play video games (I don't remember the author's name, but she had some clout, and had won some big tournaments in the sort of game that real gamers wouldn't play, and had a job with a game company), and it was this girl complaining at the start of the essay that all companies tried to do was change the look of games (ie. doom, only pinker) to get girls to play, and then at the end of the essay, talking about how shooters could use things like conflict resolution modes, and how women feel intimidated by the things that men like, like hardcore shooters with no friendly tutorial.

And two things occured to me: the first was that yes, she was simply saying that girls needed doom in a pink box, and secondly, that she was arguing for wimpy gamers, and equating them to girls, which made me angry. For instance, I believe she used counter-strike (and I may be wrong) as an example. A hardcore first person shooter with no tutorial, aimed at people who know basic game controls and want a very competitive, unforgiving experience. She also mentioned the hello kitty games, as examples of putting crap in a pink box. But then, she basically called for a knitting game in a pink box, so what's wrong with hello kitty? She was using this to show why girls are left out of gaming. So basically her explanation was a mixture of, the poor girls can't keep up, make everything easy, and how dare you sexists have serious videogames that require skill and adrenaline, MARKETED EXPLICITLY for people who want to play those games?

When females are a big market force, they will get their games. Unfortionatly the writer in question is getting her way, but it's not a feminine way: it's a 12 year old gamer way, simply make all the hard parts go away so everyone can be happy and 12 years old.

Anyways, laura crofts chunky tits (this is an old series, mind you) are NOT a reason for anybody who's not fucking stupid, to play tomb raider. It's for excitement, and shooting guns that couldn't be properly aimed, at various monsters, while crawling around chunky pixilated creepy ruins.

Or resident evil, maybe they play so they can fantasize about the unshowered girl fighting zombies. Except not. (another very old series. I think some of it may work in romance or the use of sex, but not in a non-realistic or unreasonable way)

I mean otherwise it's sort of like saying that people only play Call of Duty: Modern Warfare so they can see Captain Price's hot ass.... In reality, if women want to push into the military faster, maybe they'll be in that giant genre of video games faster.

 

this guy posts in the men's issues forum and gets mad when someone brings up women's issues, and then comes here and posts this garbage. this is either someone who puts way too much effort into trolling, or someone who desperately needs mdma.

 

If you mean me, both apply.

 

I think he was talking about that David person.

 

na, i mean david3456345324

 

Welp, I had a reply typed out for you, but my browser decided to be a shithead and close. In direct response to your presumptuous "you must not play games" thing: I'm a guy, I've got two or so boxes worth of games and still growing. I play plenty.

I'll just say this: The biggest thing that is limiting women from getting more into the gaming community is the majority of men involved in it and the way they treat women when they get outed as such on a game they're playing.

I was looking along the net for inspiration to help me better verbalize my stance on the issue and honestly, this wiki does a better job of highlighting the problems than I could: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_and_video_games

 

Maybe I'll take a look at that article later.

But I never saw a problem. There's lots of twelve year olds who play as obscene fake female names and say obscene things as a form of feeling better about not being able to play.... it's like the 12 year old equivalent of being five and running around screaming poop.

I've played MMO's with lots of females, and males, of all ages. Had several female raid and guild leaders. Played FPS with all sorts of people of all genders and sexual orientations and political orientations and ages.

Other than that, there's general bullshit, generally in more public servers and public situations, that let little kids into. There's also a lot of little shits running around and screaming ****** and faggot into their mics, but that doesn't mean gay or black people can't play video games, it means neglected kids try to be more important with shock value in a situation where they will feel no repurcussions for their behavior. And to say that these kids are keeping out women, gays, or minorities, is to realllllllly have low expectations of those people's coping abilities and intelligence and emotional fortitude.

Again, the main argument I've seen is "women are too wimpy for serious games, make it easier, and pink, but DON'T DEMEAN WOMEN AND EXPLICITLY CATER TO THEM!". :rofl:

I mean, there's all sorts of open source games, any woman who wants to make a difference can go join the project and directly influence the direction that all sorts of games go, from tremelus to battle of wesnoth. But if they show up and start talking about women in video games, they will be quickly shut out, because nobody does (or should) care about that, it's simply about making good games, because after all, women being equal, they don't need special treatment.

 

I just stumbled upon this video, totally by accident.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJeX6F-Q63I"]Feminism versus FACTS (RE Damsel in distress) - YouTube

I'm still watching it. But yeah, it seems to say what we all know about feministfrequency. And so far, in my opinion, say it very well.

 

This one is excellent, though long.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgaYBsUb5e4

It puts her to shame.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kHOn1UsWao

And this guy actually paid for it.

 

I listened to her from time to time a while back, but I never really cared too much for her. But the first video in her immediately pissed me off when I opened it. She disabled comments and ratings. Because heaven forbid that anyone expresses an opinion other than her's on her little corner of the internet.

To me, that just says "I'm so right that I won't let you disagree with me here" and I think she's said something to that effect somewhere. If someone doesn't let people challenge what they say, then I refuse to take the time to listen to them. And that's a shame too, because I know she's a smart person and she occasionally makes some very valid points even if I don't necessarily agree with her very often.

And I know that someone will say that she should censor the comment page because it will just be a bunch of people being mean to her and saying hateful things - welcome to the internet, by the way. But there will also be people with legitimate disagreements with her that shouldn't be silenced because of that. She's a coward and I don't respect her because of that.

 

She's a genius.

She isn't a feminist, she's a sales-woman. Out making her way in the world, quite well, really, by making shit up about men. Living the dream life.

She sells self-victimization and a sexist delusion of superiority. And it sells well, look at how much money she got for that lame series.

 

Just because she closed those off, doesn't mean that she's stifling discussion. The videos are being discussed in a variety of places. Youtube comments aren't a place where you're going to get a lot of anything resembling intelligent discussion.