Jump to content
Unofficial Who

Gender Diversity / Politics in games (was Tropes Vs. Women)

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Alex W. said:

 

You don't think that deciding to make this video reflects on who this person is?

Oh the actual making of the video definitely does.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's maybe the distinction I didn't make very clearly to begin with. Someone's doing this deliberately, performatively, and it's the going-out-of-the-way to do it that makes it reflective of that person in real life. It doesn't have an inherent heanousness because of the action and target, that comes out of the context in which it happens. I'm trying to shoot down his playing the "it's not real life" card, because it's not the part that's in the game that's necessarily the issue.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it happened during a live stream and you simply upload the stream as is, no big deal. Can still be seen as a dick, but not one with deliberate malice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well even in that case you're still broadcasting your behaviour, implicitly publishing a perspective of who you are.

 

e.g. If you upload a video of you saying the n word in a multiplayer game, that's pretty fucking clear - but if you say it during a stream, that doesn't really reflect well on you either.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, like I said, both dicks, but one with intent. Like that guy being idiotic enough to film the Japanese suicide forest area. To some extent he just had to have known, even if he himself was so denfranchised from A) respecting human life and B) respecting the country he is in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, BadgerFarmer said:

The game isn't really the point here, is it? It's just the medium this guy chose to publicly broadcast his misogyny, with the only importance of the choice that it's a very popular game that's likely to attract a bigger audience. But it would've been the same in principle if he'd drawn a series of pictures about beating up feminists and uploaded those - i.e. he's a nasty sexist prick.

This is exactly it.
 

It's the context of how the video maker frames the character and actions that see youtube to take the stance they did.
The character may not be a real person but they they are identified as something that many people themselves are, feminists. The video explicitly uses the context of a feminist portrayal as the motive behind doing villainous game actions and then pushes those actions as an exhibition. It is not an exhibition of how to act like an outlaw in the old west (kidnap a woman and tie her to train tracks) but an exhibition of how RDR2 can be used to fulfil the fantasy of harming, torturing, or killing progressives/feminists.

If players want to kill that character because they don't like what she represents, they can, in fact it wouldn't even be historically inaccurate to do so (women were killed for wanting the vote). What isn't part of the game however is compiling that footage to be used as what could be considered anti-progressive propaganda or a work of poor taste. 
It isn't the attack on the character that is at the front of these videos but the attack of an idealism. "Beating up annoying feminist", emphasis on the use of the word annoying there as to plant this idea of the radical "SJW" straw feminist, something that to many people is what feminists class under by default because the idea is so commonly perpetuated.

Games are creative works (you could even call them art) where the player is given a degree of co-authorship over the media. The game is the canvas and the actions available to the player is the brush they use to create meaning. If the meaning of the video was expressed in the forms of paintings, film, text etc we would be more inclined to put the creator under scrutiny, but because these actions are performed within a digital sandbox where actions exists as laws rather than rules and principles we are more inclined to look past it all and say "but it isn't real".

The medium (youtube video) is the message, and the message is how this game unintentionally sets itself up to let people intentionally play out scenarios where they can punish caricatures or stereotypes. I don't think Rockstar would have been thinking of the game on these terms when it was being designed but under the right conditions this fictional feminist could very easily become a symbol or target whom certain groups of people use to unite over, something worryingly similar to how modern anti-feminist/progressive movements form over the internet when it comes to reacting to real-world progressives.

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't really about games, but is relevant to the whole gamergate thing which was a vector for the expansion of far right youtube. Good video about how people get sucked into this cult-like world. 

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, PeteBrant said:

This bloke chose to beat up a digital representation of a women and post it online for a reaction, because there is no consequence to that action.

 

The reaction is the consequence. Preaching misogyny has an impact on some people.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Sane said:

This kind of thing should be treated the same as when someone would make a real life video with this content really. 

Nonsense. It's make believe. A video game. 

 

To expand should Limmy be tried in a court if law for his gta video where he killed prostitutes? Of course not. 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Guardian Australia has a great article up about various aspects of the RDR2 issue here.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/games/2018/nov/08/red-dead-redemption-2-calls-to-ban-violence-against-women-in-games-are-too-simplistic

 



There have been calls for these games to prohibit the capacity of players to inflict violence against women, as the game already prohibits acts of harm against children.

This appeals on an instinctive level, but to do so I think is a missed opportunity for games to powerfully instruct adult moral behaviour. Literary critic Georg Lukács advocated this transformational capacity in his 1938 essay Realism in the Balance, arguing that if “objective reality is reflected, then it becomes of crucial importance for it to grasp that reality as it truly is, and not merely to confine itself to reproducing whatever manifests itself immediately and on the surface.”

Like life, the game doesn’t oblige you to perform acts of immoral violence, even when it provides you the opportunity to do so. We can’t stop people from committing violent immoral acts in real life merely by announcing the institution of the law; we do so through that law’s intersection with punishment and reward systems, and social values – how heartening to learn that one of the YouTube video’s creators has been punished with a ban for feeding the suffragette to the alligators.

 

Also this interesting summary of how youtube media like this is used as a gateway to the alt right

Context is important. The political world today is one in which we are awake to the ubiquity of real-world harassment and violence against women – a violence self-justified within the aggressive GamerGate movements, which did so much to furnish the communication channels and communities of what evolved into the neo-fascist “alt-right”. Researching the suffragette-bashing videos for this article, the next video suggested by YouTube was one of the far-right’s favourite anti-feminists, the thoroughly creepy Jordan Peterson. The context here, too, is a post-MeToo sensibility, in which cultural awareness is finally catching on to the causal relationship between the seemingly neutral objectification of women in our cultural products, to the dangerous objectification of us in real life.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Skull Commander said:

Nonsense. It's make believe. A video game. 

 

To expand should Limmy be tried in a court if law for his gta video where he killed prostitutes? Of course not. 

Obviously I meant treated the same as a video with actors, not a real beating. And treated the same as in remove the video and ban the account. No one is talking about trials. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.