Feminists now hijacking atheism? WTF?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-08-2014, 01:19 PM
RE: Feminists now hijacking atheism? WTF?
I get the impression you are reading my posts with the intention of proving me wrong rather than understanding what it is I am trying to say. I want to encourage you to leave your ego out of a debate. If you are arguing with someone, try and prove them right in your head before you try and prove them wrong. I find, for myself, I make much better points when I do.

I'll be brief here. Perhaps we may recover.

Firstly, I want to clarify on something.

Quote:Thirdly, you have to consider the cultural context of the games. When a female heroin hacks through legions of male minions, the message being received by the player is not that women are inherently stronger and more capable then men. Perhaps if they were consumed in a matriarchal society repressive to men they could be, but that is not the society we live in. I wouldn't argue that it is a good thing to binary oppose men and women in video games so long as the female character is the hero; don't get me wrong.

In the context that I meant it, this was not special pleading, however, I did a poor job of explaining it. I don't think female characters victimizing male characters is any better or any different than the reverse. I wouldn't advocate one kind over the other and I don't think either are acceptable. I do think, in our culture at this time right now, that one kind of violence against a gender is interpreted differently than the other kind because of the culture context in which the message is received. It is a largely academic point, and moreover largely irrelevant. I should have left it out.

There are a few recurring themes I see in your's and my discussion. I don't know if it something I am not saying or something you don't want to hear. I am going to try and say it in a different way one more time.

The motivations of the developers to include these regressive tropes does not make them any less regressive. You seem determined to explain to me how the world works; I understand how the world works. I am trying to explain to you that it is harmful. We are often having two different conversations. I hope you can appreciate how it is possible for a developer to make a lot of money and be criticized for doing it.

Whether or not you are affected by the sexism in games has no bearing on whether or not those aspects of the games are sexist.

I hope you can appreciate that if in a narrative the only reason a female character has value is because a male character values her, that this still makes the female character a weak character. A female character is not strong because the male hero really wants her. When the male character rescues her she doesn't become a strong character. If anything she stops being important at that point. After all, don't most games end when you rescue the princess? You don't stick around to learn about all the reasons she is so special.

There is some subtlety and nuance in her posts that I didn't address, and I would be open to getting back to those at another time. I don't know how to say this in a way that won't offend you - I won't put in the effort to respond if I don't think it will do you nor I any good.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Michael_Tadlock's post
29-08-2014, 01:59 PM
RE: Feminists now hijacking atheism? WTF?
(29-08-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  I get the impression you are reading my posts with the intention of proving me wrong rather than understanding what it is I am trying to say. I want to encourage you to leave your ego out of a debate. If you are arguing with someone, try and prove them right in your head before you try and prove them wrong. I find, for myself, I make much better points when I do.

I think the problem is difference in methodology then. My position, like a philosophical or political version of the scientific method, takes positive claims and attacks them with scrutiny. I am not doing this for any reason other than the fact that if something should be accepted, it needs to hold up. I am not doing this for any personal bias. I have found this method to be the one that removes bias. I am more likely to refrain from accepting correct positions than accepting false ones. It isn't perfect, but it is pretty damn effective.
I am not putting my ego in the debate. It is all about ending up with the correct answer. I may come across condescending, or intellectually superior, or a complete narcissist but it is not my intention nor is it representative of me.

(29-08-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  I'll be brief here. Perhaps we may recover.

Recover from what? This is just a discussion.

(29-08-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  Firstly, I want to clarify on something.

Quote:Thirdly, you have to consider the cultural context of the games. When a female heroin hacks through legions of male minions, the message being received by the player is not that women are inherently stronger and more capable then men. Perhaps if they were consumed in a matriarchal society repressive to men they could be, but that is not the society we live in. I wouldn't argue that it is a good thing to binary oppose men and women in video games so long as the female character is the hero; don't get me wrong.

In the context that I meant it, this was not special pleading, however, I did a poor job of explaining it. I don't think female characters victimizing male characters is any better or any different than the reverse.

I apologise for the strawman.

(29-08-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  I wouldn't advocate one kind over the other and I don't think either are acceptable. I do think, in our culture at this time right now, that one kind of violence against a gender is interpreted differently than the other kind because of the culture context in which the message is received. It is a largely academic point, and moreover largely irrelevant. I should have left it out.

Fine, let's just throw that part aside. It seems we'd probably agree on that anyway. I prefer to discuss what we disagree on and why.

(29-08-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  There are a few recurring themes I see in your's and my discussion. I don't know if it something I am not saying or something you don't want to hear. I am going to try and say it in a different way one more time.

Or maybe I am just misunderstanding.

(29-08-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  The motivations of the developers to include these regressive tropes does not make them any less regressive. You seem determined to explain to me how the world works; I understand how the world works. I am trying to explain to you that it is harmful. We are often having two different conversations. I hope you can appreciate how it is possible for a developer to make a lot of money and be criticized for doing it.

I think the "tropes" are ambiguous and not as regressive as mentioned. My position when dealing with "they are trying to make money" is only to explain the higher number of male-central stories.

(29-08-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  Whether or not you are affected by the sexism in games has no bearing on whether or not those aspects of the games are sexist.

I don't think when sexual attraction is concerned, sexism can apply. Or all heterosexuals are sexist. That was my point.

(29-08-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  I hope you can appreciate that if in a narrative the only reason a female character has value is because a male character values her, that this still makes the female character a weak character.

Again, it doesn't have to be looked at that way. The reason that value is only placed when the hero does it is because it is from the perspective of the hero. If it wasn't it may not have that problem.

(29-08-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  A female character is not strong because the male hero really wants her. When the male character rescues her she doesn't become a strong character. If anything she stops being important at that point. After all, don't most games end when you rescue the princess? You don't stick around to learn about all the reasons she is so special.

The story ends because balance is restored. The hero has gone through physical agony to restore the power of the female. Peach is a princess after all.
Games need events to occur. They need conflict. It is a requirement for storytelling. If the story always ended by subjugating the female, you might have a point.

(29-08-2014 01:19 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  There is some subtlety and nuance in her posts that I didn't address, and I would be open to getting back to those at another time. I don't know how to say this in a way that won't offend you - I won't put in the effort to respond if I don't think it will do you nor I any good.

That will offend me? Trust me, you don't need to be so tactful. I'm not easily offended. Don't want to talk, freedom of speech requires the freedom not to speak.
I am unsure whether these internet debates are going to change either of our minds. I was more in it for clarifying positions and although willing to change my mind, not expecting to do much more than throw some arguments back and forth. If you thought this was likely to end in a changed position, I didn't.

If somebody points out a fallacy, and you call fallacy fallacy, that doesn't mean you are right. That just means you committed the very fallacy you accused your opponent of.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2014, 04:37 PM
RE: Feminists now hijacking atheism? WTF?
I may be me who is having a hard time understanding your position then. I am trying to make sense of your argument and I am having trouble. Perhaps if we focus our discussion you might be able to help me get there.

Let's start with the thing I think we both agree; it is possible for there to be aspects of games that are demeaning and/or sexist to women (and men, but in this conversation in particular women).

I am not sure if you agree on this point or not; it is possible for a plot device to be useful and also demeaning and/or sexist?

I think if we can agree on these two points, then we can focus on the part we clearly don't agree. Namely that the damsel in distress trope does or does not diminish the power of female characters. I would also like to get back to the objectification male and female prostitutes in the fallout series.

Could you explain to me please what you mean when you say that the trope doesn't have to be interpreted as sexist? In the example of the mario games, how is peach still a strong character in her own right?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-08-2014, 06:21 PM (This post was last modified: 29-08-2014 06:29 PM by spinosauruskin.)
RE: Feminists now hijacking atheism? WTF?
(29-08-2014 04:37 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  I may be me who is having a hard time understanding your position then. I am trying to make sense of your argument and I am having trouble. Perhaps if we focus our discussion you might be able to help me get there.

Okay, we could try that.

(29-08-2014 04:37 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  Let's start with the thing I think we both agree; it is possible for there to be aspects of games that are demeaning and/or sexist to women (and men, but in this conversation in particular women).

I definitely agree.

(29-08-2014 04:37 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  I am not sure if you agree on this point or not; it is possible for a plot device to be useful and also demeaning and/or sexist?

Yes it can.

(29-08-2014 04:37 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  I think if we can agree on these two points, then we can focus on the part we clearly don't agree. Namely that the damsel in distress trope does or does not diminish the power of female characters.

Actually I think there is your problem. I accept that it does diminish the power of the character, but what I mean is that it isn't a negative stereotype, but a necessary plot to occur.
Bad things need to happen for a plot. Therefore if the start of the game Peach is captured, that is considered a negative. Therefore a weak female character is considered the problem, and restoring her power is the solution.

(29-08-2014 04:37 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  I would also like to get back to the objectification male and female prostitutes in the fallout series.

Fine, what exactly about them?
I don't see sexual imagery as objectification. I can still find somebody attractive and then value them as a person.

(29-08-2014 04:37 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  Could you explain to me please what you mean when you say that the trope doesn't have to be interpreted as sexist?

Well this is to do with being protective. Put yourself in Mario's situation. You would fight tooth and nail to get your love back, right?
Because of the demographic, the main character is male. The loved one is female. Now is this sexist? I would say it isn't because there is at least a physical difference between men and women. This is why we aren't all bisexual. There is a level of pickiness in all of us.
This means that when we are dealing with relationships, most of us only want to have the option of one sex. Heterosexuality is more common than homosexuality, and so the demographic causes the love interest to be female.
Now the "damsel" doesn't have to be female, but they have to have some attachment to the character. Other damsel candidates can include siblings, parents, friends, or hostages that you are ordered to save. There has to be incentive.
It just so happens that the drive to save your other half is the strongest, makes the incentive higher, and gives the best reward.
That's why the damsel in distress is not sexist in my opinion. It is just more common because of who plays it.
If more gay males played games than straight males, the damsel would be male, the same for heterosexual females.
I do accept that there is a portion of gamers who are female, but the statistics are generally misrepresented. The majority of female gamers, like I mentioned, play mobile games and online non-competitive games. It would be like saying the average bird weighs a tonne, and then realising somebody allowed theropod dinosaurs into the definition of birds. Women are in a minority of players in first person shooters and the story-driven genres.
I hope that makes more sense.

(29-08-2014 04:37 PM)Michael_Tadlock Wrote:  In the example of the mario games, how is peach still a strong character in her own right?

Well she still has value at her weakest point, Mario never gives up (no matter how many times she gets captured), and is a monarch.
Outside of the actual Mario games, and into franchises, Peach is a deadly character in Super Smash Bros Brawl, and has her own game: Super Princess Peach.
It's a slightly crazy video, but it analyses Peach from a psychological perspective.
http://youtu.be/e_xbSMK390s

I may also like to add that this "trope" is going out of style anyway. This conversation probably won't even apply in the next 10-15 years.

If somebody points out a fallacy, and you call fallacy fallacy, that doesn't mean you are right. That just means you committed the very fallacy you accused your opponent of.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-08-2014, 08:46 PM
RE: Feminists now hijacking atheism? WTF?
[Image: d17.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Kaepora Gaebora's post
26-08-2017, 08:09 AM
RE: Feminists now hijacking atheism? WTF?
(07-08-2014 03:59 PM)Smercury44 Wrote:  You don't like feminism (I prefer to call it gender equality), or you don't like those whack-o's giving feminism a bad name?

Feminism started off as just gender equality, getting equal rights for women. Some really have taken it too far, and have ruined the movement and name.

Feminism started out for equality. It has become a movement for female superiority. I don't like feminism as it stands today. I am for equality across the board. A woman that starts hitting a man, should be hit back without the guy getting hauled off to prison. Equality doesn't equal a double standard, but with modern feminism and feminazis it does.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-08-2017, 08:12 AM
RE: Feminists now hijacking atheism? WTF?
(26-08-2017 08:09 AM)Birdguy1979 Wrote:  
(07-08-2014 03:59 PM)Smercury44 Wrote:  You don't like feminism (I prefer to call it gender equality), or you don't like those whack-o's giving feminism a bad name?

Feminism started off as just gender equality, getting equal rights for women. Some really have taken it too far, and have ruined the movement and name.

Feminism started out for equality. It has become a movement for female superiority. I don't like feminism as it stands today. I am for equality across the board. A woman that starts hitting a man, should be hit back without the guy getting hauled off to prison. Equality doesn't equal a double standard, but with modern feminism and feminazis it does.

Dude. You can't just resurrect a thread and not say anything about it.




More Min Gee Ziss
[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TSG's post
26-08-2017, 08:13 AM
RE: Feminists now hijacking atheism? WTF?
Are you going to resurrect every single cesspit of a thread in the Colosseum?

[Image: 6G9Yb.gif]

"E se non passa la tristezza con altri occhi la guarderĂ²."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Vera's post
26-08-2017, 08:16 AM
RE: Feminists now hijacking atheism? WTF?
(26-08-2017 08:13 AM)Vera Wrote:  Are you going to resurrect every single cesspit of a thread in the Colosseum?

[Image: 6G9Yb.gif]

Not all. Just what interests me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-08-2017, 08:18 AM
RE: Feminists now hijacking atheism? WTF?
There's always one....

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Banjo's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: