You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 11, 2016, 12:22:27 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?  (Read 13687 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Lynnette

Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #425 on: January 07, 2015, 02:27:15 PM »
I think the point Garuss was trying to make was that a lot of those who support feminism don't really know what it actually means and believes it is man-hating. Even if it's still a minority amidst feminists, it's growing simply because people are dumb fucks.

Firstly, and I can't believe it needs pointing out, gay isnt a choice, and hoping he turns out gay isn't "mean".  What's wrong with hoping he is a transvestite?  And what relevance do you think that has to feminism or to the "enemy of feminism" caption?

Gay has not been scientifically proven to be a choice* There is no proof either way because the human brain is just a bit too silly. There are plenty of theories that back the idea of being homosexual is based on personal decisions. Personally, I don't believe it, but saying that it for sure isn't a choice is wrong. It's not a "I have decided that I am gay" thing, but it could be a choice made from personal experiences.

And it is incredibly mean. Why publicly state that you hope for a homosexual/transsexual king/queen of England? In one of the tweets, it was even stated, and I quote:

"#RoyalBaby is a boy... Way to let #feminism down Kate! Could have had a third girl in line for the throne, instead of a sausage party"

Do I even need to break it down to pull out the bad in it?
First of all, most of these tweets shame the baby because of its gender. #Feminism am I right?! Not to mention the negative term she uses for a male for the throne, aka. a "Sausage party". You think she would use an equally offensive term if the next one for the throne was a girl? Nope. Just the fact that she shames Kate because of the gender of the child is horrible.




Well, this was quoted selectively I'd assume because Garuss knows (Or at least hopes, and so do I) that most here know what feminism stands for and supports it, and believes that those here know how feminism "Done right" is, hence he should be able to pull out the worst of the worst and still have an equal standing in terms of a discussion since the positive benefactors should be something that is already common knowledge.

Offline Garuss Vakarian

Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #426 on: January 07, 2015, 02:31:18 PM »
As I have said many times before. Because I chose to call out the dumb things feminists do, does not mean I am anti feminism. I just chose not to blind myself from what people do just because I want to believe in what something stands for.

Offline Blythe

Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #427 on: January 07, 2015, 02:31:40 PM »
Just a reminder to link pictures of minors.

Yes, please. Link rather than embed.

Edit: Fix'd wonky wording.

Offline SethalaTopic starter

Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #428 on: January 07, 2015, 02:33:22 PM »
I think I'm going to step in here and say to chill out a bit guys, and try to get back on the topic of Sarkeesian's videos.  Regardless of whether feminism is a moderate movement attempting to get women on a level playing field with men, an extremist movement trying to establish women as the dominant gender, or something in-between, that doesn't change whether video games need better representation of women and in what ways.  Even extremists can have a point to the arguments they blow far out of proportion.

I don't want to completely censor this discussion, mind, I just would prefer if you make a new thread to discuss it in.

Offline Kythia

  • Noooo-one Fights like Kythia no-one bites like Kythia
  • Dame
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Gender: Female
  • No one chain smokes Marlboro lights like Kythia
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #429 on: January 07, 2015, 02:34:54 PM »
Well, this was quoted selectively I'd assume because Garuss knows (Or at least hopes, and so do I) that most here know what feminism stands for and supports it, and believes that those here know how feminism "Done right" is, hence he should be able to pull out the worst of the worst and still have an equal standing in terms of a discussion since the positive benefactors should be something that is already common knowledge.

Oh come now.  The Dworkin quote is lifted from a work of fiction she wrote.  Are you seriously trying to defend that?

Offline Lynnette

Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #430 on: January 07, 2015, 02:39:58 PM »
Oh come now.  The Dworkin quote is lifted from a work of fiction she wrote.  Are you seriously trying to defend that?

I'm trying to defend Garuss.

Offline Valthazar

  • Writer ͏͏● Educator ● Gamer ● Roleplayer ● Debater ● Tech Connoisseur ● Gym Rat ● Procrastinator ● As they say, "A simple PM may lead to lifelong friendship" ▬▬▬▬
  • Suspended
  • Seducer
  • *
  • Join Date: Mar 2013
  • Location: United States
  • Gender: Male
  • Proceed and be bold. Embrace your insecurities.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #431 on: January 07, 2015, 02:45:28 PM »
Returning to the OP, I am curious to know what people's thoughts are on games where players can customize the appearance of their characters. 

For example, I know someone like Anita would criticize the large breasts of Lara Croft in the original Tomb Raider games, but could you make the same criticism of games like Saints Row, which allow you the option of creating exaggerated female characters like this (but not as a requirement by any means)?

As another example, even the damsel in distress trope - if this were simply one of several options of avenues to take in the game's storyline, would the criticism still be valid?  No one is forcing the player then to play out these tropes.

Offline Lynnette

Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #432 on: January 07, 2015, 02:51:07 PM »
Returning to the OP, I am curious to know what people's thoughts are on games where players can customize the appearance of their characters. 

For example, I know someone like Anita would criticize the large breasts of Lara Croft in the original Tomb Raider games, but could you make the same criticism of games like Saints Row, which allow you the option of creating exaggerated female characters like this (but not as a requirement by any means)?

As another example, even the damsel in distress trope - if this were simply one of several options of avenues to take in the game's storyline, would the criticism still be valid?  No one is forcing the player then to play out these tropes.

Thank you.

And I'd say it depends. If you look to games like Skyrim and more recently Dragon Age Inquisition, where breast proportions can be considered relatively average, I don't see any reason it should create any problems. Saints Row, much like GTA which has been discussed a lot, is just a big playground. However, Saints Row takes the joke a bit further. Personally, I don't mind. However, I think someone like Anita would (As in, when it comes to the "Sex appeal" thingy. Granted, you could do the same with the cock for men) Many of these games also allow to chose gender, so the "lack of female protagonists" can just be lined over as well, as you are free to chose in a lot of open-world games at this point, which is very nice. for those who actually care about what gender their protagonist is.

Hmm... Well, the criticism is directed towards women being damsels in distress, not specifically that you are forced to save them, so yes, I think the argument would still be valid, though less influential. I think what it would take to invalidate the trope as an argument would be to have more male damsels.

Offline Garuss Vakarian

Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #433 on: January 07, 2015, 02:53:35 PM »
Yes, please. Link rather than embed.

Edit: Fix'd wonky wording.

Sorry, I didnt consider that. Will edit. Edit: Never mind already edited for me, thank you.

Reaper: Thank you, I do appreciate it.

Kythia: A work of fiction, may be a work of fiction. I agree. Thats my stance on Feminist Frequency on gaming. But is it not the feminists saying that fiction is reflective of views? As well is it not feminists that are saying fiction can be harmful to how women are viewed or treated? So it's ok for her to write that, just because it's fiction? Or just because she is feminist? I leave you to answer that.So Dworkins quote is fiction ay? How is it any less offensive to men then how feminism states a gaming character with giant boobs is offensive to women?
« Last Edit: January 07, 2015, 03:18:01 PM by Garuss Vakarian »

Offline Garuss Vakarian

Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #434 on: January 07, 2015, 02:56:03 PM »
Returning to the OP, I am curious to know what people's thoughts are on games where players can customize the appearance of their characters. 

For example, I know someone like Anita would criticize the large breasts of Lara Croft in the original Tomb Raider games, but could you make the same criticism of games like Saints Row, which allow you the option of creating exaggerated female characters like this (but not as a requirement by any means)?

As another example, even the damsel in distress trope - if this were simply one of several options of avenues to take in the game's storyline, would the criticism still be valid?  No one is forcing the player then to play out these tropes.

On saints row, yes you can make the same criticism since the developers give you the choice to make breasts large. Therefore to FF it is objectifying. (Edit: But also crotch size. But no one cares about objectifying males in gaming, just women.)

Yes, it would. Because even if it is a possible avenue of story, it is still a part of it therefor a damsel in distress trope.

I dont agree with her views, but your examples do fall under her criticisms.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2015, 02:58:21 PM by Garuss Vakarian »

Offline Inkidu

  • E's Resident Girlomancer, Dedicated Philogynist, The Compartive of a Superlative, SLG's Sammich Life-Giver
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2008
  • Location: In a staring contest with the Void.
  • Gender: Male
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #435 on: January 07, 2015, 03:05:27 PM »
You know though, that's something that has always perplexed me. Where's the line of appreciating an attractive woman (something women do to men) and objectification?

Offline Garuss Vakarian

Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #436 on: January 07, 2015, 03:14:06 PM »
I believe it is objectifying her, when he does so in a point in time where he holds power over her. When it is selfish, or one sided. Vice verse, if a women does it to a man. What do I mean?

Ok: Your walking down the street, and see a cute girl, all dressed up nice. You tell her "Looking good today ms. ^^ " With a warm smile. She appreciates the compliment, and you may actually become friends or more.

Bad: Your in a restaurant like MCdonalds where they HAVE to be nice to you. You see a girl you find attractive and flirt with her. Your making her uncomfortable in her place at work, while in a position of 'power' in which she can not object. She has to be nice.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2015, 03:15:25 PM by Garuss Vakarian »

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #437 on: January 07, 2015, 06:37:00 PM »
Objectifying has to do with removing the traits of humanity from a woman to instead view them as objects.  Appreciating the appearance of a woman is, in a way, a form of objectifying a woman.  Once you are tying the interaction to observing, judging and taking enjoyment from their appearance then they have become an object.  Even the, “looking good ms” brings the conversation first down to appearance and starts from there.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2015, 06:57:48 PM by Pumpkin Seeds »

Offline Shjade

Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #438 on: January 07, 2015, 08:42:10 PM »
You want evidence of their toxc nature? Then humor me, go to twitter. Make a fake account, and pretend to be Gamergate. Be nice, be passive and polite. And simply say one of Gamergates views. And watch as the piranhas surround you, with no care for insulting you in the ways they claim people treat them online.

Are you serious?

You are, aren't you.

Garuss, no. Just no. Putting on a white hood and hammering a cross into someone's front lawn does not then provide "evidence" of how "toxic" they are when they shout and curse at me to get me off of their lawn. It's BEING toxic to PROVOKE a response.

"Be nice, be passive, be polite. And simply say one of Gamergates views." Here's the problem: Gamergate's views are not nice, passive or polite. You're asking me to do contradictory things. Does not compute.

I don't think I'm going to have any luck getting through to you, so I'm not going to waste my time. I will, however, link you a few things that, if we're lucky, might help you understand why some of these interactions happen the way they do a bit better. I hope you read them; they're quite interesting, even if you disagree.

9 things you need to know about Internet social justice activists
Men, Get On Board With Misandry: Believe it or not, the man-hating movement loves you and needs your help. Here’s why.
The Rise of the Ironic Man-Hater

I hope you take some time to think those over and reflect a little. Anytime you like; there's no hurry.

Offline Valthazar

  • Writer ͏͏● Educator ● Gamer ● Roleplayer ● Debater ● Tech Connoisseur ● Gym Rat ● Procrastinator ● As they say, "A simple PM may lead to lifelong friendship" ▬▬▬▬
  • Suspended
  • Seducer
  • *
  • Join Date: Mar 2013
  • Location: United States
  • Gender: Male
  • Proceed and be bold. Embrace your insecurities.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #439 on: January 07, 2015, 08:57:10 PM »
Objectifying has to do with removing the traits of humanity from a woman to instead view them as objects.  Appreciating the appearance of a woman is, in a way, a form of objectifying a woman.  Once you are tying the interaction to observing, judging and taking enjoyment from their appearance then they have become an object.  Even the, “looking good ms” brings the conversation first down to appearance and starts from there.

I think this is a little far reaching - since it implies that a woman's physical appearance isn't part of her humanity.  There are women with beautiful minds (who have a great sense of humor, witty conversationalists, etc.) as well as women with beautiful bodies (supermodels, actresses, etc.).  Both of these are parts of our humanity - and people are beautiful in different ways.

So for the sake of discussion, if someone is taking enjoyment in a woman's wit and sense of humor (and nothing else about her), how is this not objectification, while someone taking enjoyment in a woman's appearance (and nothing else about her) is considered objectification?

Offline Inkidu

  • E's Resident Girlomancer, Dedicated Philogynist, The Compartive of a Superlative, SLG's Sammich Life-Giver
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2008
  • Location: In a staring contest with the Void.
  • Gender: Male
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #440 on: January 07, 2015, 08:59:11 PM »
Objectifying has to do with removing the traits of humanity from a woman to instead view them as objects.  Appreciating the appearance of a woman is, in a way, a form of objectifying a woman.  Once you are tying the interaction to observing, judging and taking enjoyment from their appearance then they have become an object.  Even the, “looking good ms” brings the conversation first down to appearance and starts from there.
So... everyone in the world is absolutely guilty of this all the time, so feminists need to stop bandying this word about like it's something only men do? :\

Yeah, see that's why I can't think of simply finding the way someone looks objectifying, at least in the connotative sense that most people mean. The definition of objectify is to treat objectively as in what is perceivable by the senses. Something we all do to even people we know on a daily basis.

So, I think at least for objectify to become a dirty word it requires a mentality that only seeks anyone for their objective traits. Their looks in most cases. Paying a woman a compliment on how they dress or looks isn't objectification in the dirty-word sense. Even telling someone, "You sure look happy today." Is an objective statement.

EDIT: Okay I read the middle article and what I have to say is if you inverted that to misogyny--and I mean simply inverted every applicable word to the other--women would be up in arms. If I said, "Women should be happy that men are killing femininity!" or even half the stuff she wrote I'd be lucky to only get ten death threats a day.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2015, 09:08:16 PM by Inkidu »

Offline Shjade

Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #441 on: January 07, 2015, 09:13:05 PM »
EDIT: Okay I read the middle article and what I have to say is if you inverted that to misogyny--and I mean simply inverted every applicable word to the other--women would be up in arms. If I said, "Women should be happy that men are killing femininity!" or even half the stuff she wrote I'd be lucky to only get ten death threats a day.

It's almost like men and women have very different situations in society that aren't equal! Imagine that.

Here, wait, I just got an idea: how about you make that argument regarding affirmative action, too? You know, telling people they should go out of their way to hire more white people. Let me know how that goes over.

Offline Inkidu

  • E's Resident Girlomancer, Dedicated Philogynist, The Compartive of a Superlative, SLG's Sammich Life-Giver
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2008
  • Location: In a staring contest with the Void.
  • Gender: Male
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #442 on: January 07, 2015, 09:21:25 PM »
It's almost like men and women have very different situations in society that aren't equal! Imagine that.

Here, wait, I just got an idea: how about you make that argument regarding affirmative action, too? You know, telling people they should go out of their way to hire more white people. Let me know how that goes over.
Yeah, I thought about that after the fact, but two things:

Okay instead of inverting it to misogyny, let's try Feminist. "I think individual feminists are great, but feminists as a whole suck." So let's make that the situation, and see how far I get. Spouting stuff like DEATH TO FEMINISTS! Feminist tears, even in a funny way let's see how many feminists I get to call emotionally insecure weenies.

Second point: Just because the world shit on you at some point doesn't give you the right to be just as bad or replace it with your own double standard or hatred. A lot of people do, but like my mom used to say two wrongs don't make a right. Believe me and a lot of other people, I've got a lot of reason to hate a lot of things, but I don't and it is hard it is a constant battle.

No one should profess to hate anyone in any demographic for any reason. Hatred doesn't do anything good for anyone. All it breeds is distrust and provides evidence for your opponents.

Offline Shjade

Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #443 on: January 07, 2015, 09:26:56 PM »
You got the part where they don't actually hate anyone, right?

Offline Inkidu

  • E's Resident Girlomancer, Dedicated Philogynist, The Compartive of a Superlative, SLG's Sammich Life-Giver
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2008
  • Location: In a staring contest with the Void.
  • Gender: Male
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #444 on: January 07, 2015, 09:30:01 PM »
You got the part where they don't actually hate anyone, right?
That's my problem, because another two reason:

One, another group of people who doesn't get the word irony.

Two, if I had used the same thing but with Feminism do you think it would have been taken as pithy satire?

You don't throw around words that involve hate lightly.

Offline Deamonbane

  • A cynic by experience, a romantic by inclination and now a hero by necessity.
  • Knight
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Location: The world would be a sadder place without stories.
  • Gender: Male
  • Make me smile...
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #445 on: January 07, 2015, 09:32:27 PM »
9 things you need to know about Internet social justice activists
Men, Get On Board With Misandry: Believe it or not, the man-hating movement loves you and needs your help. Here’s why.
The Rise of the Ironic Man-Hater

I hope you take some time to think those over and reflect a little. Anytime you like; there's no hurry.

First link... yeah, just because you have a reason to be an asshole doesn't mean that you're not an asshole. Shit happens to everyone, and assuming that you are better than everyone else because we are talking about shit that happened to you doesn't mean that you have the right to condescend and be an overall bad person. There's no reason not to be polite to someone that hasn't offended you in a way other than asking an informative question to get up to speed on the discussion. That just makes you a condescending ass, and just as bad as the people you claim to be against. Just saying.

Second link: I... suppose that frosting my cake with: Yeah, I wish all feminists would just... you know, jump off a cliff onto a bunch of rocks and die," Is... okay? Just because it's ironic? No, I don't believe it is. Just because I don't happen to agree with some of the more fanatical followers of the ideal doesn't mean I going to gather them all up into a group, tell them all to stop breathing, and if anyone sees it as offensive hide behind the fact that I meant my statement ironically. It's still offensive, no matter how you slice or dice it. You want people on your side? Even marginally? Do what Germany did during the FIFA World Cup in Brazil. Yeah, they took the home team, took them to the rodeo to get ass raped, and yet in the final, all Brazilians were cheering for them. And it wasn't just because they were playing Argentina. It was because they were professionals about it. They didn't mean to humiliate or hurt anyone. They were there to win, and that's what they did. E Punto. Fanatical feminists and... what is the term, Ironic Misandrists could take a couple pages out of that book. Joking, that's fine, but there is a line, and if you cross it, you are doing the opposite of convincing people outside of your little clique that you are right. This pretty much applies to the third link too.

In effect? The ideas behind what these posts are about are right. In practice? You are going about it the wrong way. I am the kind of guy that doesn't like taunting a beaten foe or kicking a dead horse, as it were, just for gloating purposes. A third party, the kind that isn't quite sure about which side to support will read those posts and think," Damn, Feminists really are a bunch of condescending, passive-aggressive bunch of bitches, aren't they?" And... once that idea's gotten into their heads... yeah, it's true what they say that you don't ever get a second chance at a first impression. Or... second, or third, or fourth.

Offline Caehlim

Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #446 on: January 07, 2015, 10:14:50 PM »
I think this is a little far reaching - since it implies that a woman's physical appearance isn't part of her humanity.  There are women with beautiful minds (who have a great sense of humor, witty conversationalists, etc.) as well as women with beautiful bodies (supermodels, actresses, etc.).  Both of these are parts of our humanity - and people are beautiful in different ways.

There is nothing wrong with finding a person physically attractive. If you want to do it without objectifying someone, you just need to consider their needs and not just your own. If you compliment them on their beauty because you believe it will make them happy then that's not objectification. You might still be wrong, it may not make them happy, but if your intention was to care about them as a person and value their feelings then you're not objectifying them (although they may think that you are because you've given the wrong impression).

Complimenting them on their beauty because doing so makes you happy without a care for their feelings on the matter, that's objectification.

Quote
So for the sake of discussion, if someone is taking enjoyment in a woman's wit and sense of humor (and nothing else about her), how is this not objectification, while someone taking enjoyment in a woman's appearance (and nothing else about her) is considered objectification?

That depends. If you are taking enjoyment from a woman's wit and sense of humour without reciprocating by caring for her humanity and feelings, then you are objectifying her. Viewing her not as a person but just as something to serve your needs.

Offline Garuss Vakarian

Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #447 on: January 07, 2015, 10:30:25 PM »
Quote
Are you serious?

You are, aren't you.

Garuss, no. Just no. Putting on a white hood and hammering a cross into someone's front lawn does not then provide "evidence" of how "toxic" they are when they shout and curse at me to get me off of their lawn. It's BEING toxic to PROVOKE a response.

"Be nice, be passive, be polite. And simply say one of Gamergates views." Here's the problem: Gamergate's views are not nice, passive or polite. You're asking me to do contradictory things. Does not compute.

I don't think I'm going to have any luck getting through to you, so I'm not going to waste my time. I will, however, link you a few things that, if we're lucky, might help you understand why some of these interactions happen the way they do a bit better. I hope you read them; they're quite interesting, even if you disagree.

9 things you need to know about Internet social justice activists
Men, Get On Board With Misandry: Believe it or not, the man-hating movement loves you and needs your help. Here’s why.
The Rise of the Ironic Man-Hater

I hope you take some time to think those over and reflect a little. Anytime you like; there's no hurry.

Shjade I understand the need to respond to that. But we were explicitly asked not to talk about GG or feminism as a whole any more. And to stay on topic of Anita and her videos. Or her views as a whole. I would kindly ask that next time, if such a set of circumstances happens again you should pm me. Rather then continuing a conversation the thread holder asked be squashed. Further, if my side/views angers you so much you should not be debating me. Id recommend ignoring my posts if they are so offensive you must deliberately respond in spite of the request we stay on topic.

This is not me being mean, this is me backing away from what seems to be a developing argument before it it brings this thread so off topic it is trashed or other wise forgotten. Sorry. If you want to continue this conversation, please pm me or start your own thread on GG. Other wise, I think the conversation we had developed should stay in the past.


Quote
You got the part where they don't actually hate anyone, right?

That's Disingenuous Shjade. It's suggesting they all dont hate. Some do, you know that. All human beings are susceptible to fault. Meaning some of them are capable of being mean, hate full, or sexist. Further more, this generation is quite full of men and women whom would rather blame others for their own short comings. Not all, but quite a few. In my experience at least.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2015, 10:39:24 PM by Garuss Vakarian »

Offline Pumpkin Seeds

Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #448 on: January 07, 2015, 11:55:30 PM »
Objectification is certainly done across all groups.  Before rushing off to dispel and call victim, keep in mind that feminism is one of the first academic areas to really dig into this concept and many cases of large scale objectification are performed against women.  Notice I did not say finding someone attractive was objectifying them.  I also did not say that paying someone a compliment is objectifying them either.  I said that observing, judging and taking enjoyment from their bodies is objectifying them.  The problem comes that giving a compliment is a social custom whereby the person complimenting the other feels entitled to some portion of time from the other individual.  Essentially I will give you a compliment and you owe me some portion of time reciprocating.  This is where you start to get into objectification and entitlement over women. 

Simply watch the reaction of others when a woman walks by and is given a compliment.  If she does not say “thank you” with a smile, people mutter under their breath or make a nasty face or comment toward her.  This is where you have large scale objectification because the belief is simply, you owe me time.  Even here with the discussion where someone stated telling the woman, “you look good ms” and striking up a conversation.  The thought in their head is, give her a compliment and you get something in return.  Essentially this is not a woman who is busy and in a hurry, this is a woman that might be tired and wanting to go home or anything of that nature.  She is a slot machine, pay compliment get attention in return.

Also an expectation that a woman will not only be comfortable being openly stared at, but that in some way she likes and wants the attention is another means of objectification.  This is making the woman an object to be stared at for the viewer’s gratification, not theirs.  That is the problem with ascribing her humanity as part of her physical frame and then stating an appreciation for her humanity.  You are deriving sexual gratification and power from her humanity, regardless of her.

Now as for the example of wit and humor, yes this too can be made into objectification.  If every time you came to this woman you expected witty conversation and humor, regardless of her and when she could not provide that you felt as if she were not giving you what was entitled then that is objectification.  Once more she is reduced to an object to fulfill your desire, in this case witty and humorous conversation, and as such owes that to you on demand.  Just as a pretty woman owes you time for a compliment, is supposed to be appreciative of being pointed out in public or not mind being stared upon openly.  Her whims, wants, emotions, desires and needs are not an issue because an object has none of those things.  An object is to be used by whomever wants to and has the power to use that object.

Offline SethalaTopic starter

Re: Thoughts on Anita Sarkeesian's videos?
« Reply #449 on: January 08, 2015, 01:42:36 AM »
I do think that saying something to someone and expecting them to stop and give you a response is perhaps foolish, but not any sort of problem with society.  Getting overly upset if they don't give you a response is taking it too far, however.  I admit I haven't really spent any time watching how different people react to things like this though, so I only have my own anecdotal evidence; sometimes, while I'm on the sales floor at work, I'll spot someone with, say, a reference to something I get on their shirt (such as noticing a logo or meme from a game).  Every so often, I'll give them a quick nod and say "hey, nice shirt" to them, or say something to reference it.  Sometimes I get a quick response of acknowledgement, every so often we'll strike up a conversation, or sometimes I'll get ignored.  I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a brief response, or to think that I might get into a lengthy conversation about it if we've both got some free time.  However, I would never get upset that someone didn't hear me or didn't respond when I said something like that to them.

Back to the main point though, I admit that I don't fully understand "objectifying" something.  However, without any kind of real, standard definition that doesn't constantly change depending on how someone wants to interpret a situation, I find it becomes increasingly useless to a conversation.  Touching back on Bayonetta, can you say that she's being objectified?  In the context of her official art, probably yes.  In the context of the game's narrative between characters, she's definitely not.  In the context of gameplay... maybe?  Really, it seems that someone being "objectified" has become a bit of a buzzword that's code for "I don't like this character's portrayal but I don't want to give an actual reason for it".  I know that's not the intent behind it, and I'm sure that there's definitely times when a character is objectified, but there's so much grey area that it becomes difficult to communicate with it.