Anita Sarkeesian's latest video, the male gaze in video games

[Chrysia]

*snip*

The problem with your analogy is that governments are in limited supply, and always will be.

There's literally a massive industry of entertainment media, and none of it, none of it, appeals to everyone all at once. It never will and was never intended to.

You're ultimately responsible for your own enjoyment. If the concept of something appeals to you, but the most common implementation of that concept doesn't, it's up to you to either make it yourself, or find someone with the talent capable of making it for you. The problem with Anita and her ilk asking the existing video game industry to shift their portrayal of female characters is simple: men can't think like women, so they're not going to make super realistic female characters, generally speaking. If women want to change, they'll have to get directly involved in the creative process.

[deadman1]

what the hell youtube wont let me dislike her videos what the hell

She turned off Like/Dislike and comments because she doesn't like being proven wrong in her own comment section. Nor does she want anyone to see the MASSIVE dislike ratio.

[Chrysia]

what the hell youtube wont let me dislike her videos what the hell

She's disabled both comments and voting metrics on her channel as a whole.

[Rennadrel]

Well in my country there has been a hassle about going topless to the beach but outside of that I must admit that we embrace sexuality a lot easier than the anglo-culture.

Bah, I would welcome it with open arms to be honest. If men can walk around without shirts on, so should women.

[NFA]

I wish people would stop giving Anita "I need 200k just to fund my fundraiser" Sarkeesian attention. She's nothing more than a scam.

[Shekora]

Oh look, another MMOC poster to put on my blacklist.

[Templar 331]

Real enough. We can portray women as decent upstanding characters without just making them eye candy.

Why should we do this? If a woman's role in a game is to be a seductive piece of eye candy, why should that not be allowed? Why MUST she be a "decent upstanding character?"

[deadman1]

i have never seen a video with likes/dislikes turned off before

WTF YOUTUBE
come on man

Yeah you can just shut them off in the video settings when you upload stuff.

[Templar 331]

She turned off Like/Dislike and comments because she doesn't like being proven wrong in her own comment section. Nor does she want anyone to see the MASSIVE dislike ratio.

She also went before the UN and said that disagreeing with her is the same as online harassment.

[Yarathir]

I'll make it easy for you guys. Not that anyone hurts themselves.

Great start.

As you can imagine, establishing a new country and government, as well as starting a new industry, requires certain capacities. It's not just something you "do", in your free time or whatever.

You're not starting a new industry. You're creating a game. If there's really so much interest in it as people are making it seem ("all women are negatively affected by this!") people would be jumping at the bit to help you create these "inclusive games", no?

The other thing is: most citizens out there not only have any kind of capacity to start a governent - or a multi-billion-dollar global industry, for that matter.

Good thing they don't have to. The tools are out there. You just need to put in the work, like the many men and women before you, who worked hard to achieve what they did, only to have a snotty brat go "this is not okay in 2016 because it makes me feel bad! Change it!"

They most probably also don't have any desire to do so. And why would they?

"I don't want to be a chef, but I want the chef to make me things that aren't on the menu because I'm being entitled!"

Most citizens don't aspire to be politicians at all. They want to be citizens. In most cases, a discontent citizen will excerise the given and plausible means to participate in co-determing the shape and workings of the political structures they depend on. Vote, publicly discuss, perhaps demonstrate, etc.

Media and entertainment still is not equal to the government. Apples and oranges. Your analogy is still shit.

Most potential consumers don't want to be producers or manufacturers at all

Then they shouldn't try to dictate what can be in the games they may or may not want to buy.

- they just want to be consumers. The argument that people should "shut up and make their own games" is a non-argument. It doesn't make any sense, it's unintelligent.

No, it's actually exactly how it works. If there's enough demand for it, the market will inevitably change to suit the demand. As it hasn't, it has not changed.

Entertainment industry is public, just as a government is. And by design, it strives to reach, manage and service as many people as possible. Entertainment is not comissioned, nor is it exclusive. It's for everyone.

This is what makes governments comparable? So bowling balls and oranges are the same as well? "Why can't I eat a bowling ball but I can eat an orange! They're both round!"

The whole "make your own games" argument is like being the snotty kid who doesn't want other kids to play with the same toys like them. It's like the one little bugger that throws a fit when other kids in the neighbourhood get their squirt guns too. You guys are afraid that there are these other people who are gonna take your toys away. You think gaming is just "for you". But gaming is literally for everyone, and it's perfectly valid for everyone and anyone to voice a specific interest and preference in the product. You might agree or disagree with it or whatever, but It's childish to stand there and cry "go away!"

No, actually, the vast majority here is being pretty happy with what they got. Everyone has squirt guns. Then the other kids (people like Sarkeesian) come around and demand one too. Then when they get the same squirt gun everyone else has, they demand that they get a different squirt gun that is tailored to their exact liking. In that metaphor, the snotty brats would be people like Anita Sarkeesian and other trendinists who want to change an existing industry to their liking while a vast majority of the people already playing games are fine with it.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with any individual, or group of people, to voice their opinions, interests or demands to a public, profit-oriented industry. Even if it's the wretched hellspawn Anita Sarkeesian and the hordes of flesh-eating, penis-mangling feminazis you're so terrified of. Perhaps they're doing exactly what Chrysia suggested: overthrowing the "government"?

No one is saying so. There's also nothing wrong with people using their own voice against their voice and criticize said group of people when they want to change things to fit their desire. Which is what people are doing.

There's no reason why they should "make their own stuff".

If you want x thing or you'll call people "y", then yes, "make your own stuff." is a fair reply.

It's ultimately at the discretion of industry professionals if they're interested in supplying a particular demand. Anyone can go out and campaign and say: we want games to be this and that. Even if it's complete horsheshit what they're saying. They're public people and potential consumers. Nothing wrong with anybody campaigning for stuff. You're just gonna have to handle that and deal with it like a reasonable adult person would.

And people are dealing with it and using their own voice to counter those voices, especially the faulty logic those people use as a justification to demand change. You're just gonna have to handle that and deal with it like a reasonable adult person would.

[Remilia]

Seeing as how this is a gigantic clusterfuck and not remotely civil, closing this.