Originally Posted by Joseph Silverman

Women ARE the only ones who get the short end of the stick -- the short end of the stick is widespread societal discrimination. Both sides have some discomfort, but one is SIGNIFICANTLY better off.

I don't really want to get into the conversation, mainly because I don't feel like arguing and also because I don't have a strong opinion about the subject, but I wanted to say that the video that Ikosan posted is quite interesting. Her points are well articulated and she appears to reference actual scientific research. Whether her sources are all valid or not can be questioned, but I had just enough time to find some of the interesting examples that she mentions. One of them is the study of male and female work fatalities. (pages 6 and 7)

Now by no means I wish to say that I support all of her points. In her other videos she speaks of the apocalyptic scenario that may be caused by the feminist movement and how it may lead to an economic collapse; which to me sounds like a huge stretch. But, she offers a perspective that I have never really considered before. And since she is a woman, it essentially eliminates (at least to some extent, as some could argue that her thinking is an effect of the male society) the male bias that could be attributed to her arguments. In all honesty, I find the idea of "men's rights" organisation quite silly as my firm philosophy is to deal with anything that life throws at you. However, I was surprised with how strong some of her arguments are, or in the very least, appear to be.

Now it's time for me to go back to work, so I'm out. Just wanted to say that I always enjoy reading those kinds of discussions, regardless of what my own opinion on the subject is. In this case, it's pretty much null as my knowladge about the topic is less than shallow.

Originally Posted by Joseph Silverman

Women ARE the only ones who get the short end of the stick -- the short end of the stick is widespread societal discrimination. Both sides have some discomfort, but one is SIGNIFICANTLY better off.

It is true, but the result is that feminists are quick to chop off everything thar resembles a stick in any way.

Any small issue that might be harmless creations of someones personal experience, like a heterosexual man creating a male-centered story where the female partner ends up in a fridge, which really only is the result of the creators own personal experiences and the fear of losing close ones.

Or the classical prince saves princess, which comes close to being verboten and removed as a quest to enforce equality with new childrens books being rewritten in weird ways.

I dunno about ben, but I VERY much agree with you eld -- that shit is crazy. I encounter it all the time, and I think it's partially espoused in these videos, and it's damn loony. But let's not use it to discredit the whole argument -- What you're describing is a small, MOSTLY harmless problem that should not be used to distract from the very real social issues.

i'm sorry if this thread is specifically about videogame gender studies, but here's a recent speech about the issue of congruity in the game industry that I found interesting.

GDC12 - The Dysfunctional Three-Way Rant -...

I also recommend those interested to watch the infamous dragon speech.

Really nice find Poop! Enjoyed them but being a guy I felt all guilty like which gotta mean something... And the manic pixie thing (Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless mind) really bothered me because I never seen it as something derogatory...

them thar uppity women having the audacity to stand up for gender equality!

Originally Posted by equil

i'm sorry if this thread is specifically about videogame gender studies, but here's a recent speech about the issue of congruity in the game industry that I found interesting.

That'll require a whole other thread.

we could name it "the gaming elitism" or "why my taste is better than yours"




;)

Eld if keep making your posts so much better than mine I may just have to let you do all the talking forever.

Originally Posted by eld

It is true, but the result is that feminists are quick to chop off everything thar resembles a stick in any way.

Any small issue that might be harmless creations of someones personal experience, like a heterosexual man creating a male-centered story where the female partner ends up in a fridge, which really only is the result of the creators own personal experiences and the fear of losing close ones.

Or the classical prince saves princess, which comes close to being verboten and removed as a quest to enforce equality with new childrens books being rewritten in weird ways.

i don't think this is the problem at all. i honestly believe there would be no issue with men portraying women they way they want if that wasn't the ONLY way they were ever portrayed. Guys are never going to get tired of looking at boobies and scantily clad women, or being the hero that saves the poor damsel in distress. the problem is women have no choice in how they are portrayed, and never have. women have had no chance to even define their role for themselves, only to serve one of the premade roles created for them by a man. Men get to be portrayed as the bad ass heros that kill predator, save the world from a robot attack or alien infestation, race car driver, jet pilot top gun bad ass, what guy doesn't want to be those things? he still gets the opportunity to be portrayed that way even if sometimes he is portrayed as a child molester or wife beater.

women only get to see themselves has housewives or sluts, prostitutes or man servants. think if every movie ever made that has a man in it was like a lifetime channel movie. where men are always the bad, beating, raping, murdering psychopaths? and think if there was nothing you could really do about but bitch about how that's not how you like to be seen by the rest of the world, or how you don't want you son to grow up thinking that's how your suppose to act to be a real man.

i don't think any feminist is really attacking your freedom of speech to tell the stories and scenarios of your fantasies, i think they are reacting to the lack of freedom they have to be portrayed in a way they would like. and i think getting pissed off and grinding an axe is a perfectly acceptable way to react if your back is against the wall. it doesn't mean that is going to help the cause, or create a dialogue men are going to want to partake in, i just think its a perfectly natural reaction.

Originally Posted by arshlevon

i don't think this is the problem at all. i honestly believe there would be no issue with men portraying women they way they want if that wasn't the ONLY way they were ever portrayed. Guys are never going to get tired of looking at boobies and scantily clad women, or being the hero that saves the poor damsel in distress. the problem is women have no choice in how they are portrayed, and never have. women have had no chance to even define their role for themselves, only to serve one of the premade roles created for them by a man. Men get to be portrayed as the bad ass heros that kill predator, save the world from a robot attack or alien infestation, race car driver, jet pilot top gun bad ass, what guy doesn't want to be those things? he still gets the opportunity to be portrayed that way even if sometimes he is portrayed as a child molester or wife beater.

women only get to see themselves has housewives or sluts, prostitutes or man servants. think if every movie ever made that has a man in it was like a lifetime channel movie. where men are always the bad, beating, raping, murdering psychopaths? and think if there was nothing you could really do about but bitch about how that's not how you like to be seen by the rest of the world, or how you don't want you son to grow up thinking that's how your suppose to act to be a real man.

"Only" is a bit strong.

Not all movies, not even a majority will enforce those ancient roles, most movies will feature a wide array of female roles, but sometimes we'll get the occational hysterical woman or housewife, and sometimes we'll get the nearly always male pedophile or rapist,

mostly because these things exist, but we're quick to shout "oh no the woman was portrayed as a housewife", and some excuse for a human might think "that's how women should be"

Maybe I'm lucky in my taste in series and movies, and exposing myself to cinema other than just the regular hollywood stuff though.

If anything we could use more female lead, not because it is sexist to not have a female lead, but because the variety could be good, and we occationally get good movies with good female leads, even in a male-dominated industry.

Which brings me to use mass effect as an example, wouldn't this series have been a pretty male-dominated series unless you were given the choice to create a female character with the exact same events and choices but from a females perspective?

Things like this is good, more variation but with the same old recipe.

Originally Posted by arshlevon

i don't think any feminist is really attacking your freedom of speech to tell the stories and scenarios of your fantasies, i think they are reacting to the lack of freedom they have to be portrayed in a way they would like. and i think getting pissed off and grinding an axe is a perfectly acceptable way to react if your back is against the wall. it doesn't mean that is going to help the cause, or create a dialogue men are going to want to partake in, i just think its a perfectly natural reaction.

Oh no, I'm not worried about my freedom of speech, I'm more worried about other females getting the side-effect of *some* of the feminism, such as the ones who *do* want to be the princess, or the object of her partner, or someones muse, or don't mind the occational housewife portrayal, or might even find joy in one of the less harmful stereotypes.

Or she might be looked down on by other women for being close to "unrealistic idealistic physique" for being naturally thin and being called a skinny bitch, a result of the campaign against the man-created ideals = big is beautiful, skinny is ugly.


I'm highly for equality with the full freedom of being unequal, without anyone being treated less than human.

I find it the most important to grind in the aspect of equal rights into every human early on in life, so that we *do* have the freedom to play around with stereotypes, flawed characters or sexy hyper-idealistic ones without anyone feeling any less about any person.

Originally Posted by eld

"Only" is a bit strong.

Not all movies, not even a majority will enforce those ancient roles, most movies will feature a wide array of female roles, but sometimes we'll get the occational hysterical woman or housewife, and sometimes we'll get the nearly always male pedophile or rapist.

Well first, the reason rapists are almost always portrayed as males is because the vast majority of real life rape cases are male on female rape. Wasn't it you that claim we need to stick to real life and what works in cinema or we'd have arty farty flicks? Someone said in this thread anyway. A female rapist or pedophile* would be fresh, but wouldn't be able to really pluck upon most people's fear, since the stories we get hammered into our heads to watch out for are men in the bushes, not roving women popping out from under our car to drag us off into the park.

*of which there has been one, I forget the movie, but it was a 30 some year old woman, with the Judie Dench (who plays a possible lesbian obsessed with the female lead), and a 16 year old boy, set in britain I believe, it was quite good.

And second, Yes plenty of movies have women in them, but going back to the original videos, they are often used more as plot support rather than written as full characters with agency. Even when they are written as full people, they will often be alone in an otherwise all male cast. Not even Sex in the City has the reverse true of a sole man in an otherwise all female cast.

So really I think "only" is quite an appropriate word. Yes you might watch more well rounded non-hollywood movies, but does the average 8 year old girl?

Originally Posted by poopinmymouth

Well first, the reason rapists are almost always portrayed as males is because the vast majority of real life rape cases are male on female rape. Wasn't it you that claim we need to stick to real life and what works in cinema or we'd have arty farty flicks? Someone said in this thread anyway. A female rapist or pedophile* would be fresh, but wouldn't be able to really pluck upon most people's fear, since the stories we get hammered into our heads to watch out for are men in the bushes, not roving women popping out from under our car to drag us off into the park.

*of which there has been one, I forget the movie, but it was a 30 some year old woman, with the Judie Dench (who plays a possible lesbian obsessed with the female lead), and a 16 year old boy, set in britain I believe, it was quite good.

I don't see every old man as being a pedophile just like I don't see every female being a housewife or a damsel in distress, but if the movie is good and it happens to be about a pedophile or a damsel in distress I don't mind it at all.

Originally Posted by poopinmymouth

And second, Yes plenty of movies have women in them, but going back to the original videos, they are often used more as plot support rather than written as full characters with agency. Even when they are written as full people, they will often be alone in an otherwise all male cast. Not even Sex in the City has the reverse true of a sole man in an otherwise all female cast.

Again, that is not a bad thing, it's just not varied, most secondary characters will end up quite dull in a bad movie, and the main character will end up being a male in most cases.

I praise the lord'ah every day for the fact that women are not like in sex in the city, but then again, that series rapes you with stereotypes from every direction.

Originally Posted by poopinmymouth

So really I think "only" is quite an appropriate word. Yes you might watch more well rounded non-hollywood movies, but does the average 8 year old girl?

Probably not, but if she's fortunate she'll have parents there to teach her good values.

Which again is the core of just about everything I've said, people are the problem, not the media that they get skewed by, as the very clear weakness in people to be so easily skewed shows a bigger issue than just this, they'll be skewed by anything.

Originally Posted by eld

Which again is the core of just about everything I've said, people are the problem, not the media that they get skewed by, as the very clear weakness in people to be so easily skewed shows a bigger issue than just this, they'll be skewed by anything.

Do you actually have a kid yet? I don't either, but am preparing to foster, and the number one fear I have, and that current parents I ask, is how to prepare them for life. You can give them the best instruction ever, perfect ideas of justice, equality, fairness, sharing, blah blah, but they leave your walls, they see TV, they watch movies, read comics, go to school with little shits from bad parents, etc.

Yes, upbringing is infinitely important, but this idea that we can fix societies injustices with just good parenting, rather than also concurrently making positive adjustments to how our media is made (and really, aren't we game artists at least partially in control of how we portray men/women in games?), these issues are not going to go away or get fixed.

Also this idea that *anyone* who absorbs media on a daily basis is somehow immune from it's affects is a bit naive. There have been myriad of studies, showing that advertisements, movies, comics, etc all affect us, they get in our brain, we think about them, and as a whole, they can shift our ideas of what reality is like. If the vast majority of media and popular culture depicts women as sexual objects and lesser than men, it will affect all of us, even those conscious of it and trying to avoid it.

Originally Posted by Joseph Silverman

Could you clarify this? I'm not near as invested in this and i still read your post as saying 'but what about the men?';

ie:

Women ARE the only ones who get the short end of the stick -- the short end of the stick is widespread societal discrimination. Both sides have some discomfort, but one is SIGNIFICANTLY better off.

If I am actually saying, "what about the men", how does that automatically mean that A:My intent was solely to "Derail" And that B:I automatically believe and am therefore stating that prejudice against men is exactly equal to and thus cancels out prejudice against women?

In this thread alone, it would seem the only people who want to marginalize and state that one gender has no prejudices against them worth talking about, and pretty much do not exist, are those fighting so hard to tell us that people like this woman know what they're talking about.


I think your "there's only one stick" analogy is a great example. By stating that there is only one stick, and that women are the only ones who get the short end of this stick of "widespread societal discrimination", you're automatically eliminating anyone else from being compared, discussed, or thought about in any way other than "privileged".

Does anyone not see how weighting a scale with only the problems of only one gender group, coming to the conclusion that this one group is the only one who's getting the short end of any stick, is inherently flawed? You do understand that the point of view of people like the women in this video do not actually consider how sexist her own opinions and conclusions are? Many of her conclusions and solutions end up on the side of prejudice against men.

Don't like that there are more than average amount of women being killed off in what you feel is a "meaningless" death?
Solution: Don't ever kill a woman off to serve a male storyline.

Don't like the fact that women are an inspiration or meaningful to men as creative inspiration?
Solution: Get on youtube and tell everyone how it makes you want to puke.
(This very idea in and of itself is sexist, not just the solution.)

Don't like the fact that the term "femi-nazi" is being used to describe elements of your movement who are extreme?
Solution: Explain to everyone that the only reason this term exist and that anyone who sees feminists as extreme exist solely because of lies spread by mainstream media influenced solely by conservative, chauvinistic men. Also, anyone who uses the term or believes that there is such a group as "feminist zealots" is also a chauvinist.

Originally Posted by poopinmymouth

This is why I accused you of not having researched this kind of stuff

Now, if I am a complete noob to the thought of issues that affect women as you say, was it not your intent by starting the thread to "educate" me?

And if I am the one who's never done any research, why is it that I was able to see that this woman does nothing more than parrot people that she's heard, and by extension you parrot the things that she said?

I've shown you evidence that this woman, and the women before her, don't actually stack evidence against evidence, and use examples that they themselves couldn't have read, or simply misread because of their bias. Yet, you state that this is irrelevant, and has no negative impact on your or her arguments, because somehow if you're fighting for womens "equality", you don't really have to have any facts or real statistics.

I sincerely believe that women in the video, and people like yourself who subscribe to Her thought process have a sexist bias. The idea that women are the only ones slighted in any way worth discussing(you consistently insinuate chauvinism on anyone who might not agree with this woman or yourself, as well as marginalize any problem caused by sexist ideas like those put forth by the women in the video, by using phrases like"few select outliers") But somehow me attempting to expose that is unacceptable.

Nowhere have I stated that issues that effect women negatively do not exist. Nowhere have I stated that issues that affect women and men are equal. I have simply pointed out that this this person is not even close to being impartial or unbiased. You yourself have attacked me in ways that have shown that you yourself are biased by your consistent insinuation that if I disagree that I am a chauvinist, or simply uneducated.

Why is this important to me? Why should it be the most important thing to anyone who considers themselves an activist for women? It is nothing more that the highest form of hypocrisy to be running around pointing the finger at men and how sexist they are, while simultaneously pushing sexist ideals yourself. Claiming to be for equality, while saying things like:

"For centuries male filmmakers, writers, painters, artists of all kinds have often cited women as the inspiration for their brilliant masterpieces.

I swear if I hear one more story like this I’m going to scream. Or puke. Or both.

Women are not here for men’s inspiration or celebration or whatever else."[/b]

Now, I didn't start a thread toting the sexist bias of video games against men, nor did I make a video on youtube "educating" people with "facts". All I have done is point out how biased and sexist people like this can be. Why? because she is the one who is running around yelling "Sexist" at the top of her lungs.

Something stands out that I don't understand. It keeps being brought up but I am not getting it :

i don't think any feminist is really attacking your freedom of speech to tell the stories and scenarios of your fantasies, i think they are reacting to the lack of freedom they have to be portrayed in a way they would like. and i think getting pissed off and grinding an axe is a perfectly acceptable way to react if your back is against the wall.

This doesn't make sense to me. I don't think there is any law (at least in western societies) preventing Sofia Coppola to make great movies, or any woman to enter a film school or an advertising firm.

Now of course one can always argue that in some companies or studios still stuck in a middle ages mindsets and/or run by stupid CEOs, there can be some plain stupid pressure and prejudices towards women. But I think that stating that women today are stuck against the wall is risky. It basically ignores the great progresses of our society in terms of gender equity, accomplished thanks to the dedication of strong men and women fighting for our rights over the years. I am not saying we are totally there yet, far from it. But when it comes to the fields of creative medias like music, movies or games, (the ones that shape our rich culture - advertising is a whole other subject ...), I think it's safe to say that a talented woman with something to say, paint or sing has the same tools and opportunities as any man with something to say, paint or sing.

Now a very interesting point to look at is, how come that in fields that most likely to accept women just as much men, there are not as many female artists as males ?

First one could think that there might be a gender-dependant affinity behind it. After all, who knows ? But even with the (rather obvious) differences between men and women, we have no way to know whether or not there are fondamental hard coded differences of personality between the two. I personally don't believe there are, since I think that a major part of a person's personality comes from his or her environmental development. (genes are not as deterministic as they seem to be). It's quite great actually ! It makes everyone equal, with nothing bound by physiology.

Then, there is environnement (the education we receive from our parents, and the influence of society around us). Gender equity is evolving, but current parents can be "a generation behind" in that matter. Especially in the US, there is a strong tradition of "marrying ones daughter". I think this is bullshit, and many parts of the world left that kind of stuff behind a while ago. But it's safe to assume than many great potentially creative women artists never got "into it" simply because they never lived in an environment in favor of creativity ... because their parents gave them an outdated "women are supposed to do this, not that" restricting environment to grow in.

On the plus side, I do believe that things are changing for the best nowadays. It is, however, a slow process. Still, to me, the angry girl from the video is not going in the right direction. I think she would get her point across better (and would become a great example herself) if she was less sex-obsessed and more productive. Again, no need to rant about bad stories - just tell me a good story instead!

Maybe this is her first step towards a personal change ? breaking out from a mold she was forced in (maybe a family with a messed up tradition of "our sons are all lawyers, our daughters marry rich men"). Anyways, that's just a wild guess haha

Originally Posted by paulsvoboda

I've watched the first two and while they are extremely well done, her thoughts and arguments are laid out clearly and concisely, I can't help but think in certain cases she is stretching her points too far which consequently diminish their effect.

I watched them all and felt the same. Its a shame because folks will latch onto these things and use them to cling onto their existing views.

so i read this amazing artical some time ago, about how the amount of effort you put into something happening, is directly proportional to how much you want it to happen.

i think it directly applies to the subject of this thread:
http://www.poopinmymouth.com/tutorial/money_mouth.htm

you're talking the talk here Ben, but what are you ACTUALLY doing to change things?

Originally Posted by poopinmymouth

Well first, the reason rapists are almost always portrayed as males is because the vast majority of real life rape cases are male on female rape.

the amount of female on male rape is actually more common than you think. The problem with it though is society dosn't really want to admit it exists. In Britain I think it wasn't till 1994 that it actually became illegal, and even now when it exists the laws almost always in favour of the woman, normally arguing 'well the guy must have wanted it (due to evidence of an entire automatic and coercable bodily function)' and due to the social gender role of men having to 'shut up, put up and man up' most men don't go on to report anything and even when they do a lot of the times its 'missed' out of the statistics because its not 'real rape'. I'd still say there is more cases of male on female rape but it certainly isn't as one sided as media/society would like to believe

Originally Posted by almighty_gir

so i read this amazing artical some time ago, about how the amount of effort you put into something happening, is directly proportional to how much you want it to happen.

i think it directly applies to the subject of this thread:
http://www.poopinmymouth.com/tutorial/money_mouth.htm

you're talking the talk here Ben, but what are you ACTUALLY doing to change things?

Why the term "Slacktivism" is conceptually misleading: http://technosociology.org/?p=904

(and in case you're slow, what I was attempting to do is present feminist ideas and harmful stereotypes that content creators keep using over and over to a group of... content creators in games)

Originally Posted by Pior

I think it's safe to say that a talented woman with something to say, paint or sing has the same tools and opportunities as any man with something to say, paint or sing.

On the plus side, I do believe that things are changing for the best nowadays. It is, however, a slow process. Still, to me, the angry girl from the video is not going in the right direction. I think she would get her point across better (and would become a great example herself) if she was less sex-obsessed and more productive. Again, no need to rant about bad stories - just tell me a good story instead!

Dude, what are you basing the first sentence of yours I quoted on? It's total bullshit. You have zero clue or research as to why there has been only a single female director nominated for best picture... ever. Or why there are so few (any?) female studio heads in games. You're just claiming with no evidence whatsoever that there is no barrier. How do you know? Tell me. Because it comes across as you just *feeling* that it must be so, and there is no way that the boy's club could extend to all the important aspects of being put in control of a project, essentially eliminating women, legalities aside. It's functionally a ban, just like a law would be.

And, on the 2nd, the girl is anything but angry, stop saying that. I'm angry that you and others keep painting her as angry, trying to make her point less. It's sexist to imply that women must always be calm about everything, even when describing incredibly harmful ways that culture portrays them. And there is plenty of room for people who critique. Are you telling me the only person who can ever critique something is someone who can also create? She has in another video, stated her mission; to make feminist 101 level ideas accessible to youtube viewers, and simplify them so they aren't so locked up in academia. She's done an incredible job, despite the chauvinist naysayers. You'll be hard pressed to find any woman anywhere who has focused on gender studies who will say, "nope she's totally wrong, and angry! what a bitch!"

And things are not changing. The numbers of women in boardrooms, parliaments, management positions, hedge fund investments, hasn't moved since 2001. Ten years of zero change in gender makeup at the top level of any industry or government. Within advertisement, the video I linked earlier shows that if anything, advertisement is even more sexist and objectifying toward women than it was in the 70s! Again this shows you just do not know what you are talking about and are just *so sure* that it must be equal, or nearly so. It's not, you're wrong, maybe you should think more on these subjects before hand waving away the points in the original video, or hell even actually research a few, and maybe you can better your craft in narrative treatment of men vs women.

Originally Posted by Ikosan

the amount of female on male rape is actually more common than you think. The problem with it though is society dosn't really want to admit it exists. In Britain I think it wasn't till 1994 that it actually became illegal, and even now when it exists the laws almost always in favour of the woman, normally arguing 'well the guy must have wanted it (due to evidence of an entire automatic and coercable bodily function)' and due to the social gender role of men having to 'shut up, put up and man up' most men don't go on to report anything and even when they do a lot of the times its 'missed' out of the statistics because its not 'real rape'.

Tell me, is all this canceled out by the fact it is still, to this very day in 2012, impossible to rape your wife in several states?
Your point on "well he/she must have wanted it" is used all the fucking time on women as well.
And female rape is vastly under-reported as well.

I have no doubt it is more common than I might think, but it is nowhere even approaching parity. That, and even if it was 50/50, if you want a "go-to" scary badguy, based on all of cinematic history and modern day news, a male rapist is your trope. I'm sure making a female rapist would make for an engaging antagonist in a movie, but at this point you'd need to be an incredible director and focus hard on that part of the story to make it scary, since it's just not inbred in our collective psych to go "oooooooh" /shudder like we do with male rapist characters.

Originally Posted by poopinmymouth

Why the term "Slacktivism" is conceptually misleading: http://technosociology.org/?p=904

(and in case you're slow, what I was attempting to do is present feminist ideas and harmful stereotypes that content creators keep using over and over to a group of... content creators in games)

so essentially, you're trying to educate, or enlighten, or just raise awareness of an issue, to a group of people who're already aware of that issue, but choose to ignore it because of a number of determining factors.

those being:

• the people in charge of them call the shots
• those people are making decisions based on income
• that income is determined by people buying their product

you're doing it wrong. you're preaching to people who have little to no control over what they're told to make, even department leads take their orders, that includes lead writers.

and again, you're not ACTUALLY doing anything yourself, other than spreading a bunch of videos that people either already agree with, or sympathise with.

so put your money where your mouth is, start your own LGBT studio and break the trend dude. make the games you want to make, the way you want to make them.

or... is it not that easy?

If your idea of "largely agreeing" is the sentiment expressed in this thread, you need to check your reading comprehension, because it has had several very antagonistic posters implying these aren't real problems.

And I know there is little control on our end, but that doesn't mean zero. There is still some modicum of creative control, and there are several people on polycount, myself included, working on indie games that can roll in these ideas. To paint every person as a helpless 3d drone is insulting.

But that's the thing Ben - I cannot tell for sure as a whole, but I can certainly speak from experience.

I do not claim to be an expert on any subject, but I know what I witnessed! I see hundreds of women singers, writers, and so on. I saw women in charge of top positions at companies I worked at, saw women classmates being the most brillant students and later on being part of the most successful professionals in my school days.

I did not bury myself in studies to back myself up with numbers, but I do know for certain that at least in some fields, things are progressing, and in others, things are actually quite good! I never claimed that the situation is good everywhere tho. I was simply referring to the "back against the wall" argument. In the situations I witnessed first hand, in the countries I lived in (which are not representative of the whole world, and also quite different from the media-based, corrupt US of A), it simply wasn't the case - I did witness full equity more often than not. You might not believe it, but that won't change what I saw

I put advertising and media aside in my previous post because it is, indeed, a very different matter (lowest denominator), and something I know close to nothing about since I am lucky to have lived in conditions quite free of advertisement background noise. (eiher by luck, or by consciously shielding myself from it because that's something I truly dislike wasting my time with - therefore no TV, and so on)

Also, chill out! No need to get all worked up on this man, this is simply an interesting discussion, not some kind of heated debate on TV. There's no need to be that aggressive, as it tends to play against your points and that's a shame! It's the same about saying that this girl is angry. I never implied that since she is a woman therefore she must be calm (where did you get that from ?). I am just saying that in order to present a point of view, being calm and articulated is more effective than name calling and being bitter (I am basing this observation on the movie tropes and the Bayonetta video. I did not watch any others, simply because I do not appreciate her delivery as a speaker.)

My point about low numbers not moving in governments and top companies is just as true in France as in the US, it was a global statistic that it hasn't moved since 2001. Of course there are talented women in all fields. The point is that they are not given the creative reins of any projects with money or likelihood to be distributed at a global level.

Originally Posted by Ikosan

Feminism and the Disposable Male - YouTube < Interesting 'argument' from the flip side of the coin (not really directly related to comic books but does have an interesting take on gender stereotypes for men)

I didn't really feel comfortable saying this woman is wrong on issues of gender, though she is talking about men, whatever. I ran it by a few friends with a better understanding of this, and one woman in particular had a good response I'm pasting here.

Originally Posted by friend

The video you linked (ugh, I didn't relaly want to sit through all of it) hinges on the notion that sexist ideas like "women and children first" and "male disposibility" aren't created out of sexist culture already. Men have always valued women and children as inherent property (emotional or literal) that they own and control, and so therefore patriarchal, benevolent sexism has come out of that ("Such pretty women need protecting.") The idea that women have made men disposable some how plays into the fear that men should matter all the time, when in reality, they should matter as human beings, not as the sole arbitors of opinion, power or influence. MRAs and anti-feminists don't handle societal deconstruction very well and take feminist movements to be identical to what men have actually, literally been doing to women since the "dawn of time."