Posted by: seanmalstrom | March 12, 2015

Email: On feminism

Before I start, I want to let the readers know I am a woman and in a lot of cases I support some of the causes of feminism but feminism like Workers Unions and Civil Rights movements are the sort of thing that begins because there are serious injustices facing said groups that had to be fought for. The problem comes that once the major issues are resolved, the group doesn’t want to dissolve so they get bored and start finding stupid little things to nitpick about.  Work Unions were established so that workers weren’t putting their lives in danger for terrible wages during the industrial revolution but many companies deal with union members not working because they can’t get fired thanks to their unions.  The Civil Rights movement (50th anniversary of Selma by the way) was created because African Americans weren’t allowed to sit or eat at the same places as everyone else but now you have certain folks flip their shit if someone makes an off color joke.
 .
The same applies to feminists.  Once upon a time women were nothing more than property of their husband or father expected to do nothing more than make babies and cook meals and feminists rose up so that women had rights to vote, have access to birth control and things like that but now, those injustices are corrected, they have to find other things and when they can’t they start creating injustices. This is where good old Ana Sarkesian comes in.
.
Where are all these feminists and social justice warriors when it comes to real atrocities in the world?  In Saudi Arabia and many middle eastern countries, women are abused and treated as slaves.  Many aren’t allowed out unless they have a male escort.  They’re forced to stay covered at all times and I think in one case there were women dying of easily treatable illnesses because they weren’t allowed to be examined by male doctors and women weren’t allowed to become doctors.  In many African nations, women getting raped repeatedly is a common occurrence and there’s no laws to help them.  I remember someone sharing a story with me that someone created a sort of “anti-rape” vaginal insert that would essentially rip to shreds the penis of the rapist.  Effective? Yes, but sad that the situation there is so bad, women would have to resort to such a thing to protect themselves.  And yet where’s Ana Sarkesian and her social justice warriors when it comes to this sort of injustice to women?
.
That’s easy to answer.  It’s much easier to sit on your ass in front of a webcam and whine about Princess Peach and girls with big boobs in games.  Ana Sarkesian would never risk her life to travel to a dangerous place like the middle east or Africa.  If she was truly devoted to her beliefs, she’d go out and do something about the true injustices against women and more people would see her a true women’s right’s advocate instead of just some whiny feminazi complaining about video games.  I posed the same question about Jack Thompson some years ago.  You remember him. The lawyer who was convinced that video games were corrupting our children and turning them into violent sociopaths. This guy claimed to care about the well being of children, but yet all he did was go after video games.  Never mind all the kids being raised by abusive drug addicts or the ones who are starving.  Because that would actually take effort on his part and Jack was only interested in political gain
.
What I don’t get is why gamers get so hot and bothered by her instead of just ignoring her.  Nothing she can say or do is going to make video games go away. The industry is more likely to crash and burn through its own greed and ignorance than being ruined by Ms. Sarkesian. Yeah Blizzard made that butchy looking lesbian character for Overwatch but they still made Sylvanas and Japan doesn’t seemed phased by feminism at all.  All the big chested, skinny girls in games are still coming from a country that is fine selling used panties in vending machines.  Honestly in Blizzard’s defense, I think they would be in a situation of damned if they do. Damned if they don’t.  I honestly think Nintendo added more playable females to the new Smash Bros. just to keep people like Sarkesian off their backs but then turned around and gave players the option to play as Zero Suit Samus in a sports bra and shorts, then counteracted that by having Shulk (hero from Xenoblade) have the option to run around wearing nothing but swim trunks.  You’d be surprised how often I see sports bra Samus and swimwear Shulk when playing Smash Bros. online.  You are right in that we are simply genetically hard wired to like attractive members of our species, and it really is about the haves vs. have nots.
.
Follow the money. Sarkeesian (sp?) made like $400,000 for 2014. She is getting a ton of money by doing this.
.
If there was any honesty in the discussion, women like the makers of King’s Quest or Gabriel Knight would be highlighted and exalted. Instead, they are said to not exist at all. If they want to talk game creators who blur the lines of gender, how come the creator of M.U.L.E. is never mentioned? Was the game developer a male or female? (he did have a sex change operation)
.
There is a reason why this is going on. It is the same reason why, back many years ago, the esteemed analysts did not see the DS/Wii juggernaut. It is because they are not gamers. They have zero interest in the history of gaming. The history of gaming is extremely interesting, and I have tried to highlight what I can on this site. Many people do not know that Steve Jobs played a part in the creation of the game Break-out or that gaming heavily influenced the Apple II computer design. Computer industry has literally whitewashed that aspect out because PC revolution is not as cool if it was a fruit from the tree of the gaming revolution. People of all ages were playing video games in the early 1980s. Gaming has never been the recluse of males. Not even PC gaming.
.
The problem is that they are arguing from a false premise. The premise is that gaming excludes women and that the game industry excludes women. It is simply untrue on any level you look at it. This is their rhetorical technique. They place in front an argument, based on a false premise, and have people ‘debate’ over it. But by doing so, it rhetorically solidifies the false premise as true.
.
Sarkeesian (sp?) isn’t even a gamer. Those are her words.
.
During the Wii-era, core gamers would argue that non-gamers were going to destroy all of gaming. But these non-gamers were actually gamers. They just preferred Wii Sports instead of Halo. They had no intention of changing Halo or any other gaming. What is going on, today, is what people thought were happeneing a generation ago. Sarkeesian is a non-gamer. Many of those carrying her water are non-gamers. And they do intend to ‘change gaming’.
.
Much of the reaction is due to what has happened in the comic book and science fiction book industries. However, those industries are much more controlled. The video game market is also more mass market and dependent on that mass market. Games must sell or the company goes kaput. It is risky enough to make a video game. SJWs are not helping the risk factor.

Categories

%d bloggers like this: