This bitch never says anything good about games ever.
There was literally no reason for people to complain about Unity not having a female playable character.The reason people made a fuss was because of the made up on the spot excuse Ubisoft used, which was only used to try and not to piss off Internet "feminists" who complain about everything that isn't empowering to women.
Quote from: citrus snek on October 22, 2015, 10:54:57 AMThere was literally no reason for people to complain about Unity not having a female playable character.The reason people made a fuss was because of the made up on the spot excuse Ubisoft used, which was only used to try and not to piss off Internet "feminists" who complain about everything that isn't empowering to women.Most feminists in gaming aren't looking for "empowerment", though. Just subjectification.
Evie doesn’t feel like a male character who was a last minute gender swap but like she was developed from the ground up with a strong, capable and spirited personality.
It's all about social discussions rather than the game itself.I just ran into the trans part and remembered Ubisoft's horrible pandering and making trans/gay characters for the sake of being trans/gay for a statement. Another reason I hate Ubisoft and other game devs pandering.
Quote from: Luciana on October 22, 2015, 10:58:03 AMIt's all about social discussions rather than the game itself.I just ran into the trans part and remembered Ubisoft's horrible pandering and making trans/gay characters for the sake of being trans/gay for a statement. Another reason I hate Ubisoft and other game devs pandering.Pandering is bad, sure. But we wouldn't play games, ever, if they didn't pander to our interests. They're basically all about pandering--so it's just a matter of how subtle you do it.It's conceivable that a trans character could be introduced into a game without it being blatantly pandering. ie. them mentioning it all the time in every line of dialogue, or having it not be their sole defining characteristic.
QuoteEvie doesn’t feel like a male character who was a last minute gender swap but like she was developed from the ground up with a strong, capable and spirited personality.This is the only thing that I'm really iffy on in the review-- I don't like this idea that a person's personality has to be tied to their gender. The thought that came before it describing the twins' personalities, with Evie being collected and Jacob quick to act, makes it kind of seem like she's saying that a woman displaying irrationality is bad writing.And obviously the whole "trivializing issues by being in a violent AAA game", but I don't think you really stand by that either.
I agree.
On your first point, though, I can see where you're coming from. It reminds me of what Christopher Hitchens wrote in some column awhile back about "why women aren't funny," and the only times when women are funny is when they are attempting to "emulate" male humor, or by being ostensibly masculine in general (Sarah Silverman, Roseanne Barr; "dykes, Jews, or butch").
Now I'm not saying that's what Ubisoft is doing with the twins, but I do think it's an issue with her take-away. If she is a good character, it's not because she's a strong independent woman who don't need no man; it's because she is more than a tool for pushing an agenda, an actual character with natural progression. That is true regardless of sex or gender, with any personality traits.
Is that not what she's saying, though? She wants female characters to be more than female characters--she wants them to be actual characters with natural, human progressions. That's her agenda, as far as I'm able to tell.
Quote from: Verbatim on October 22, 2015, 11:44:07 AMIs that not what she's saying, though? She wants female characters to be more than female characters--she wants them to be actual characters with natural, human progressions. That's her agenda, as far as I'm able to tell.I'm referring to the part where she said that it doesn't feel like a last minute gender swap, implying that there should be some sort of different progression or personality if a character's a male or female. If a character is well written, it shouldn't matter if the character was originally a male or female. Same goes with sexuality.
Stop with these 'Trigger warnings' everytime you make a thread including Sarkeesian. It creates an unnecessary stigma and almost seems like a meme (considering what counts as one on this website) to me.SpoilerI have nothing to say about the video since I haven't watched it. Maybe tomorrow you'll get a post about the actual topic.
@LuciNot ignoring your post--just don't have the time to look over it right now. In class and such.
Quote from: Prime Megaten on October 22, 2015, 11:47:31 AMQuote from: Verbatim on October 22, 2015, 11:44:07 AMIs that not what she's saying, though? She wants female characters to be more than female characters--she wants them to be actual characters with natural, human progressions. That's her agenda, as far as I'm able to tell.I'm referring to the part where she said that it doesn't feel like a last minute gender swap, implying that there should be some sort of different progression or personality if a character's a male or female. If a character is well written, it shouldn't matter if the character was originally a male or female. Same goes with sexuality.Yeah, I think that's what she's saying, though. I don't think that's what she was implying there, exactly--more that, because of the current formula, we've come to expect male/female characters to fall into specific stereotypes, which is her whole problem. It's not that they "should"--it's that it's a pleasant surprise that they don't.
Quote from: Atticus on October 22, 2015, 11:51:47 AMStop with these 'Trigger warnings' everytime you make a thread including Sarkeesian. It creates an unnecessary stigma and almost seems like a meme (considering what counts as one on this website) to me.SpoilerI have nothing to say about the video since I haven't watched it. Maybe tomorrow you'll get a post about the actual topic.People get pissy regardless whenever I support feminism, so I'm mocking them by putting a mock trigger warning. That's the only reason I do it, and I will continue to do it.
It always made me cringe since 99% of Tumblrites use "trigger" in the wrong way like everyone here uses cuck.
It could have been phrased a bit better, if that's that case. I don't like the implication that arises from that wording.
Quote from: Prime Megaten on October 22, 2015, 11:55:25 AMIt could have been phrased a bit better, if that's that case. I don't like the implication that arises from that wording.Well, think about it--wouldn't it be silly for a feminist to believe that men should be written as arrogant, stupid, etc.?Not all feminists are Tumblrite misandric maneaters, you know.