Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
×

:icontompreston: More from TomPreston


Featured in Collections

Other Video Games by Essteka

jornals by sunbead

literature by hallo-ich-Liebe-dich


More from DeviantArt



Details

Submitted on
March 10, 2013
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
11,876
Favourites
54 (who?)
Comments
516
×
Tropes Vs Women in Video Games: Part 1 Damsels in Distress
Anita Sarkeesian's first video in the much ballyhooed Tropes Vs Women in Video Games has finally been released. The verdict? Acceptable. There's really nothing that offensive in the video at all, as it's mostly just a history of the "Damsels in Distress" trope and how it's used in video games. It's fact based and fairly interesting to watch.



The only two criticisms I have are as follows:

1. As someone who's done a LOT of research into the making of Donkey Kong (primarily for the short Flossed In Time storyline that I illustrated for Brent and Dan www.brentalflossthecomic.com/f… ), I can say without question that her info about how Popeye came to be turned into Donkey Kong is wrong.

Donkey Kong came about because Nintendo of America's president Minoru Arakawa placed a large order for Radar Scope, a popular Japanese game). By the time the game arrived in New York, months had passed and interest in the game had waned, leaving thousands of unsold units stored in a warehouse. Behind in the warehouse rent, Minoru begged Nintendo of Japan's president Hiroshi Yamauchi for a new game, which led to Shigeru Miyamoto being assigned to create a new game using the Radar Scope's hardware.

Nintendo never "failed to acquire the license" to Popeye. They actually produced the game.... after Donkey Kong. In fact, it was while waiting for the licensing rights to be acquired that gave Miyamoto the time to work on Donkey Kong. When Donkey Kong became a huge hit, Miyamoto was reassigned to work on Popeye.

2. The only other criticisms is her rather harsh words towards Shigeru Miyamoto. The way the video plays out it kinda makes him seem like a devious, conniving, and scheming tyrant who oppresses women with his constant use of the "kidnapping the princess" plot device. Naturally I don't believe for a second that Shigeru Miyamoto ever set out with the goal of oppressing women.

But outside those two criticisms, there's really nothing that offensive about the video at all. Her assertion that female characters are often portrayed weak and unable to fend for themselves is entirely valid. And this is especially true when it comes to Zelda and how her role reverts to the damsel in distress trope after being enormously beneficial during both Ocarina of Time and Wind Waker. To be honest, that always bothered me in both those games. Zelda finally reveals herself after helping you out the entire game in disguise, and the second she's in her "princess" outfit she gets kidnapped and is helpless. That renders all her bad-ass heroine character development null and void.

So too are the faulty reasons for not including Princess Peach in the NSMBWii and NSMBWiiU games as a 4th playable character ala Super Mario Bros 2. Nintendo has jokingly said that the reason she's not playable is because writing the code for how her dress moves would've been "too problematic," which is a pretty bullshit excuse considering how Peach is a playable character in Super Smash Bros with no advanced dress programing to boot.

Of course, despite how straightforward and reasonable this video is so far, we have yet to see what the rest of her series will be about. Naturally she left off characters that were strong and independent, like Samus or Laura Croft... because they ARE strong and independent and the video isn't really about that.

I really don't think that gamers needed to throw such a vehement hissy fit over her proposed video series. There are going to be a lot of complaints and people freaking out, simply because so much controversy has surrounded Anita Sarkeesian's kickstarter... mostly from gamers trying to discredit her before her series came out, like some sort of reflexive defense mechanism. All that hatred bubbling up makes it VERY hard to have an intellectual discussion on the subject without devolving into outright sexism and bashing against Anita for issues NOT connected to the info she's providing. You want to know why she blocked comments on her video? Because people have sent her actual death threats for speaking her mind and because anytime anyone talks about Anita, she's usually the subject of ACTUAL SEXISM. That's kinda proving her point, guys. Might wanna try to calm down and stop that?

I'm gonna watch the rest of her series, and I'm sure I'm gonna find more to criticize and disagree with. I've never completely agreed with her views, and frankly I would have taken the subject from an entirely different angle, but I do think that talking about sexism in video games IS actually necessary and beneficial to the medium. This was seriously nothing that needed to be blown up into such an outrageous controversy, and the complete lack of wanting to engage her on an intellectual level shows how incredibly immature the gaming community actually is.

She is not gonna take your games away, guys. She's not even advocating for taking away skimpy outfits and sexy characters. Talking about issues helps us resolve the issues, and it's a demonstrable FACT that the gaming industry as a whole tends to treat women in particular rather poorly. Be they a character, a game designer, or a gamer playing the games. I guess what I'm saying is... stop freaking out. EA requiring always online DRM in single-player games is more damaging to the gaming industry than Anita talking about sexism tropes.

Priorities, people, priorities.

Sidenote: I actually kinda like the mock "outfit" they gave Peach in the thumbnail and end of the video. Reminds me of when she dressed up as Luigi for the Super Mario World comic that debuted in Nintendo Power back in 1992.
  • Listening to: Yogscast Tekkit Series
  • Watching: Futurama
  • Playing: KAG
  • Eating: Jaffa Cakes... still
  • Drinking: I really don't update this section very often
Add a Comment:
 
:iconnazizombiekiller217:
NaziZombieKiller217 Featured By Owner Aug 6, 2013
not really shes touching something that she views as sexist cause shes a femanazi.....
Reply
:iconnotmolo:
NotMolo Featured By Owner Jul 31, 2013
Is this the woman who got attacked by obvious trolls and gained a huge victim complex?
Reply
:iconreligion0:
Religion0 Featured By Owner Mar 25, 2013  Hobbyist Photographer
Wow, she's really hating on Miyamoto. He does work with a team, right? It's not just his ideas that are implemented in the games.
Reply
:iconjfdp13:
Jfdp13 Featured By Owner Apr 6, 2013  Student General Artist
D:>
Reply
:iconforestrabbit:
ForestRabbit Featured By Owner Mar 20, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
I think people forget the fact that she wants her videos to be used for EDUCATION. She wants parents to watch them with their children, and for teachers to share them with their students. Do people REALLY think that she'd want them all to see the countless death and rape threats that she gets in the comment section of her videos?
Can you imagine how many horrible messages she would get a day if she left the comments on? How many of those messages could be seen by the people she wants to reach out to?


And like other isms, people don't always have to actively think about doing them in order to do them. They can be very subtle and sneak into our everyday lives, and into the way we think and see the world.
That said, I think it's possible for Shigeru Miyamoto to have used the damsel-in-distress trope in his games because it was a sort of safety net. It was something that worked in stories and other forms of media. It was something people were exposed to, and fell back on.
Or it just sort of "happened" that way during the creative process. Maybe without even thinking about it, he fell back into that sort of "comfort zone". Not saying he's a horrible person for it, but it is something we can look at and criticize and think about.


IDK, just my thoughts. ^^;
Reply
:iconsekele:
Sekele Featured By Owner Jul 9, 2013
in that sense, she fails at educating
Reply
:icontompreston:
TomPreston Featured By Owner Mar 20, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Agreed.
Reply
:iconsekele:
Sekele Featured By Owner Jul 9, 2013
a compelling very compelling, thought-out counter-argument to this video
[link]
seeing as this video is done by a female contributor, I assume you won't dismiss her arguments as easily as those of other critics

as far as I'm concerned, this girl is more qualified to do videos on this subject, than Anita will ever be
Reply
:iconchazfullmetal:
ChazFullmetal Featured By Owner Mar 19, 2013  Student General Artist
Well, it's at least a little bit important to note that the majority of 'Gamers' are male (supposedly) and there's numerous issues surrounding what males like to see, and in the end if it makes money then the companies who make it will use it. Sex ALWAYS sells, and very few businesses are above using that to their advantage. It works both ways, but not so much with games i would imagine. There's plenty of handsome men in gaming (perhaps debatable) but they don't necessarily sell the games to women. That's not to say that women gamers are being excluded, but i seriously doubt that game developers go out of their way to be sexist to women. They just want to make money (to produce more/better games, to make more money, to produce more/better games, etc) , and it's not just game devs that use sex appeal to do so. You can see it literally everywhere.

I'm not saying this is a good thing, but you can't just complain away a valid and effective marketing tool.
Reply
:icontompreston:
TomPreston Featured By Owner Mar 19, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
"If you don't say anything, nothing will get done."
Reply
:iconchazfullmetal:
ChazFullmetal Featured By Owner Mar 20, 2013  Student General Artist
Okay okay ^3^
Reply
:iconbinks95:
binks95 Featured By Owner Mar 16, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
This video does send out a message and I get it but I sometimes wonder about these things. She's just stating facts. She's not changing anything. It would be better if this video were some sort of appeal rather than a rendition of a 'public information video'.
She's basically just saying, 'Hey guys this sucks, and I'm going to tell you why it sucks.'

And, hey man, still eating jaffa cakes! Brits got you hooked, huh?
Reply
:icontompreston:
TomPreston Featured By Owner Mar 16, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Jaffa cakes are delicious, though I have been forced to find Americanized substitutes lately...

Anyway, this is just part 1 of several videos. It's meant to be educational so of course the first video is presenting what the problem is. I'm sure that later videos will explain why the problem is bad and how we can fix it and what some good examples of strong female leads can entail.
Reply
:iconbinks95:
binks95 Featured By Owner Mar 16, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
*gasp* Americanised substitutes D: not even once! I can't imagine what they're like compared to real ones. Perhaps when we got oreos we should have given you jaffa cakes.

And, I suppose you're right. At least, I hope so. If she's got any sense that would be a good thing to cover.
Reply
:iconlbdnytetrayn:
LBDNytetrayn Featured By Owner Mar 16, 2013
Hmm, I'd heard that they didn't get the license to Popeye at first, but then the success of Donkey Kong changed United's mind. DK seems to be a pretty clear parallel to Popeye in many ways.

As for the Peach in NSMB thing, I think the true reason lies with Wario. That is, they explained the reason for his not being included is that people expect Wario to play a certain way, which is different from how the Marios play. Similarly, I imagine that if Peach were playable, people would expect her to float, and since all four characters are supposed to be identical in ability...

That said, I've thought long before that putting her in a pink version of the Marios' attire (such as in that video) would resolve the issue nicely.
Reply
:iconburningresurrection:
BurningResurrection Featured By Owner Mar 16, 2013
reasonable adressing her opinion to disable comments
[link]
Reply
:icontompreston:
TomPreston Featured By Owner Mar 16, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Hey, you know what? NONE of this backlash against Anita's harmless video series would've ever happened had it not been for the Amazing Atheist. So yeah, no. Not gonna fly with me on this one. He's the REASON there was any controversy at all, so bullshit if I'm gonna listen to HIM try and take her down further for something HE caused.

I used to like the Amazing Atheist but lately... his views on feminism and women in general, and his rather shitty attitude towards everyone has put me off completely. Gives us other atheists a bad name.
Reply
:iconburningresurrection:
BurningResurrection Featured By Owner Mar 17, 2013
I haven't really watched his other videos, but even if all of his other videos were psychotic ramblings, he'd still have more of my respect, because no matter how threatening or abusive the comments get, he does not disable them

I also agree with his argument that by setting herself up as a victim, she's taking away any credibility from her own arguments
Reply
:icontompreston:
TomPreston Featured By Owner Mar 17, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Enabling comments means that much these days? That's pretty sad...
Reply
:iconburningresurrection:
BurningResurrection Featured By Owner Mar 18, 2013
If you want a discussion, people must be able to reply to you, otherwise it's just monologing
Reply
:icontompreston:
TomPreston Featured By Owner Mar 18, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Aren't most documentaries monologing? If you go to a theater or watch a documentary on TV, you don't have the ability to comment back. Are those less valid because they don't have a comment system the way YouTube does? If someone posts a documentary on YouTube does that automatically mean they HAVE to accept comments? It's more about presenting an issue to think about on your own time, than it is trying to have a back and fourth dialogue.

I just don't understand why so many people put such intense weight on comments.

And again, I will re-stress that the YouTube comment system is atrocious and NOT a good place for intellectual discussions. If I wanted to make something meaningful and post it to YouTube, I would probably remove the comment system too.
Reply
:iconburningresurrection:
BurningResurrection Featured By Owner Mar 19, 2013
I do not consider the video a documentary
Not even a review

Maybe I'm just spoiled by BBC and National Geographic, but I do expect a more well-informed and objective approach from a documentary
Even the environmentalist documentaries do show people trying to come-up with solutions to the problems at hand, and give credit to those that made actual real-life advances, instead of just going "corporations are bad, mkay?" adnausium

And as you yourself pointed out, this is an issue that should be discussed about, so why take away people's ability to discuss it
By blocking comments on a subject like this, you are essentially sending out the message "I'm right, you are wrong, you'll all go to hell"

And I do agree on the bad quality of the YouTube comment system, but it's not impossible
Reply
:icontompreston:
TomPreston Featured By Owner Mar 19, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Why does everyone seen to miss out on the fact this is part 1 of many subsequent videos? Everyone is criticizing it for not being completely well rounded when it's only a fraction of the whole.

I still do not believe disabling comments is "preventing" discussion. We're discussing it now, and so is everyone else on the internet. But rather than focusing on what she's saying it seems like people would rather nitpick unimportant secondary aspects like YouTube comments.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconjm-henry:
JM-Henry Featured By Owner Mar 16, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
I'd agree with femfrequency if it weren't for the fact that those games weren't designed to make feminists happy:
[link]
Reply
:iconjm-henry:
JM-Henry Featured By Owner Mar 16, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Except that there isn't a 'real' issue in these games, just a perceived/ constructed one. Alright the above was admittedly dismissive, but try to think about what was on the minds of those developers at the time, and that was to:
1.Create games that are fun to play, and thereby
2. Make a profit

Does anyone really think that these developers went out of their way to create games just to 'offend' and 'subjugate' women? No. That's insanity. In the case of games as old as Double Dragon where they literally had 7 seconds to tell the plot, your gonna wind up with simple, one-dimensional characters. The damsel in distress is just one of the simplest to setup story lines. And to quote Thunderf00t(source vid) as to why: "Because most people in healthy relationships care for eachother, and are therefore willing to make significant sacrifices for their loved ones"(ex. punching through an entire army of thugs to save a girlfriend)

Sarkeesian's video seems to take the gaming industry and make it out to be some patriarchal conspiracy where there was never one to begin with. Their sole focus was making fun to play games that would create a profit, and as much as you may dislike how it sounds, they weren't created to make feminists happy, or subjugate women.
Reply
:iconerix19:
Erix19 Featured By Owner Oct 10, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
Reading this, it makes me wonder what Anita has to say about the young men who died saving their girlfriends from the Aurora, Colorado theater shooting. It's been found that men tend to do stupid things when a woman is in trouble because that's how they are wired. Take the military. In combined units, the male soldiers would go out of their way to protect their female comrades.

If the damsel-in-distress trope (disregarding overuse) is really so horrible, then people need to step back and take a long look at how men and women are wired. The trope is pretty much hardwired into a man's brain. Yes, women are more than capable of taking care of themselves without a man but in the end, each sex is one half of a whole. Neither was really meant to stand on their own. We were meant to support each other. 
Reply
:iconjm-henry:
JM-Henry Featured By Owner Oct 11, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
"It's been found that men tend to do stupid things when a woman is in trouble because that's how they are wired."
True, and it comes from millions of years of human survival. Modern society still conditions men to behave that way. This vid honestly sums it up in the best way, if you mind the length:
Reply
:iconerix19:
Erix19 Featured By Owner Oct 11, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
I also went to bed thinking about this and I came to the realization that I like the story more than I do the characters. Not to say I don't like the characters but the story itself seems to take precedence. If I like the story, then the characters in it have my support. 

I also have a simplistic way of looking at entertainment. If a game, movie, or show is meant to make you think, then you'll think. But if it's something that should just be enjoyed without thinking too hard on it, then just enjoy it and don't think about it. If it can pull off both, then awesome.

I tend to get into spats with my sister over Disney because she likes to point out the major flaws, like the so-called Stockholm Syndrome seen in Beauty and the Beast...all while ignoring the fact that the original tales behind many of Disney's features were Darker and Edgier and by today's standards, not kid-friendly by a long shot. So yeah, Beauty and the Beast may show a very real condition but that's not the point behind the story. Not to mention when it's my childhood you're messing with, I get pissed. Just let me enjoy my movies and games without bringing up this other shit.
Reply
:iconjm-henry:
JM-Henry Featured By Owner Oct 11, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
My sentiments exactly :)
Reply
:icontompreston:
TomPreston Featured By Owner Mar 16, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Well that's a shitty dodging excuse. "These games weren't made with feminists in mind, therefore they shouldn't have any problems if they contain potentially offensive imagery involving women and perpetuating horrible stereotypes."

I'm sorry but that's no excuse, and it sidesteps the real issue by being dismissive.
Reply
:iconjm-henry:
JM-Henry Featured By Owner Mar 16, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Except that there isn't a 'real' issue in these games, just a perceived/ constructed one. Alright the above was admittedly dismissive, but try to think about what was on the minds of those developers at the time, and that was to:
1.Create games that are fun to play, and thereby
2. Make a profit

Does anyone really think that these developers went out of their way to create games just to 'offend' and 'subjugate' women? No. That's insanity. In the case of games as old as Double Dragon where they literally had 7 seconds to tell the plot, your gonna wind up with simple, one-dimensional characters. The damsel in distress is just one of the simplest to setup story lines. And to quote Thunderf00t(source vid) as to why: "Because most people in healthy relationships care for eachother, and are therefore willing to make significant sacrifices for their loved ones"(ex. punching through an entire army of thugs to save a girlfriend)

Sarkeesian's video seems to take the gaming industry and make it out to be some patriarchal conspiracy where there was never one to begin with. Their sole focus was making fun to play games that would create a profit, and as much as you may dislike how it sounds, they weren't created to make feminists happy, or subjugate women.
Reply
:icontompreston:
TomPreston Featured By Owner Mar 16, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Not planning to offend is still no excuse. Just because the developers didn't set out to create games with sexist themes, doesn't mean that those themes don't exist at all or that the continued use of such themes in this day and age aren't damaging.

She's not saying anything we as gamers haven't already said a hundred times before.
Reply
:iconjm-henry:
JM-Henry Featured By Owner Mar 16, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Correct me if I'm wrong, but, aren't themes usually planned by developers? If they're not setting out to make those games sexist in the first place, then there is no 'theme' only a perceived, and very misguided, notion.

Wanting a sexist 'theme' to exist in something isn't the same as it actually existing. The damsel in distress plot isn't some age old plan to display women as the 'weaker sex', it's cliche, but it's not part of some plot of the "patriarchy".
Reply
:iconfreezer88:
Freezer88 Featured By Owner Mar 17, 2013
By that way of thinking, The Pokemon Jynx should still look like this: [link]
Reply
:iconjm-henry:
JM-Henry Featured By Owner Mar 17, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
True, but there's still some cultural stuff surrounding it's design that a lot of western gamers would never know without researching them(being based on Yamauba, myth figure/ Yamanba, a sort of Ganguro Style). It is a shame though that in the west, our first reaction to things we don't have full knowledge of is immediate offense :/
Reply
:iconsekele:
Sekele Featured By Owner Mar 15, 2013
Just found this pretty civilized and reasonable rebuttal of her video
[link]
Reply
:icontompreston:
TomPreston Featured By Owner Mar 15, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Sigh... Exceptions don't disprove the rule. Women have frequently been used as "goals" in the vast majority of video game history. That's an undisputed FACT and that's ALL her video was supposed to be about, talking about that trope.

I'm so sick of people trying to discredit her on the grounds that she's doing something "damaging" to the video game industry. It's really beginning to come across as whining about not wanting to deal with problems.
Reply
:iconsekele:
Sekele Featured By Owner Mar 17, 2013
I don't think you entirely get the point here

this isn't about there being a game where the kidnapped woman fights back (even if only in the ending cut-scene)

it's about the fact how she misinterpreted the game
Double Dragon Neon is largely tongue-in-cheek when it comes to the treatment of the original game's tropes

she presented it as if it was playing the entire thing straight, just as the original did

this suggests one of two things about her
she either didn't do any research beyond maybe the original (in which case she should have talked about that one), or, which is even worse, she was fully aware of this, but deliberately left that part out
this brings me back to her being before compared to the christian fundamentalists, who used cherry-picked cartoon clips taken out of context to further their cause

he also gave a reasonable defense of the "damsel in distress" trope, pointing out that while it may be outdated, it is hardly malicious at it's core, seeing how it ultimately just comes down to protecting you'r loved ones, which is a valid motivation for a protagonist

he proceeds to demonstrate how her methods can be used to make anything look legit for the uninformed, also showing the other side of the coin (men being expendable dumb muscles, existing only to serve women)

finally, he analyzes her earlier works, and point out that the standards and demands she has are frequently contradicting themselves, this creating a situation where they can't be met
this mean she either does not know what she wants, or she purposely created a no-win situation so that her little personal war will never end
Reply
:icongingerfoxy:
GingerFoxy Featured By Owner Mar 15, 2013  Professional
I wonder if I'm the only female without strong opinions on this, as well as generally women's roles in life... I mean the dark ages have passed, women are no longer considered property and can take on any roles they want.
Reply
:icontompreston:
TomPreston Featured By Owner Mar 15, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Very true, but we're still not anywhere close to being equal just quite yet. There are parts of the world where women don't get to take on any role they want, are still considered property, and are denied inalienable human rights.
Reply
:icongingerfoxy:
GingerFoxy Featured By Owner Mar 15, 2013  Professional
Yeah, I did keep that in mind, but didn't mention to keep the comment short. I just think the Western side of the world has kind of lost sight of their goal. Hardcore feminists could be pushing on with just that - finding ways to help women around the world, doing something to change inhumane laws and such. Instead their focus seems to be on over-complicating their own life and finding more things to blame on local men.
Reply
:icontompreston:
TomPreston Featured By Owner Mar 15, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
If feminism today has one stumbling block, it's that the "rah rah! Women's rights!" voice from the 50's and 60's still lingers in it today. Back then it was more important and vital to being so vocal and loud about wanting equal rights and condemning people who disagreed, but thanks to the progress feminism has made, that's sort of become a bit antiquated now. It's still important to champion for women's rights, but the tone is still set in the militant extremist voice of the early years. It comes across as petty nitpicking, and people tend to dismiss it, which kinda sucks.

At least that's my understanding.
Reply
:icongingerfoxy:
GingerFoxy Featured By Owner Mar 17, 2013  Professional
Well, yes. I wouldn't take anything away from the feminists of the past, as well as suffragettes and the like. I just wish that now the whole gender thing would simply become irrelevant and people would focus on making sure the basic human rights were set in stone for everyone all over the world.
Reply
:icontompreston:
TomPreston Featured By Owner Mar 17, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Agreed, but the sad fact is that we're not quite there yet. We've made a lot of headway but there is still a lot left to go.
Reply
:iconthatmexicanuzer:
Thatmexicanuzer Featured By Owner Mar 14, 2013
MY one main criticism with her, and the main reason why I don't take her seriosuly, is The Elephant in the Room, that she doesn't allow comments nor ratings on her video.
She denies our ability to debate with her, and even the ability of her fans to praise her for such a good work she's done.
I agree with you, the vid, is not that offensive, compared to the other crazy stuff she's said in the past, but I won't take her 100% seriously, until she allows comments to be written on her video.
Reply
:iconfreezer88:
Freezer88 Featured By Owner Mar 17, 2013
1) What makes you think that she'd respond to any comments had she enabled them?
2) What's stopping you or anyone else from discussing the video elsewhere (like right here, for instance)? It doesn't count unless you can debate her directly?
Reply
:icontompreston:
TomPreston Featured By Owner Mar 14, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I don't understand why that somehow diminishes her views. The only reason comments are disabled is because a HUGE army of trolls want to troll the shit out of her, and she's not gonna allow that. YouTube is not the place to be making a thought out and concise response comment anyway. She's not stopping people from making response videos or writing blogs and or journals to respond to her video, just preventing known assholes from being aloud to be assholes on her page.

What happened to videos before the days of up-votes and instant comments? Were those videos made prior to YouTube any less valid?
Reply
:iconthatmexicanuzer:
Thatmexicanuzer Featured By Owner Mar 14, 2013
Trolls are gonna troll man, we all know that, even the most tame thing that could exist in the world will get trolled by some asshole. She is not allowing people to agree and disagree with her on her cahnnel, if it can discredit an asshole like Onision (P.S I am not comparing the both of them intelectually) why can't it discredit a relatively well spoken and intelligent person like ANita?
She has to allow the debate to start, even if it means a bunch of assholes saying bullshit like "Tits or gtfo"
Reply
:icontompreston:
TomPreston Featured By Owner Mar 14, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Frankly I think there are exceptions for everything. And this is one of them. Anita has been the subject of an insanely overblown and horribly misogynist attacks by gamers, culminating in actual sexism and death threats. Again, she's not denying people the right to criticize her work or have a debate simply by closing YouTube comments. Those YouTube comments were NEVER going to be civil and beneficial, and would only further prove her views of sexism by the sheer amount of it that they would receive. We can still criticize and discuss her issues, and she's made it clear that she does seek out the criticism as well.

Blocking YouTube does not mean she's "hiding" anything or "censoring" anyone's opinions any more than when I blocked comments on my art during a particularly sensitive time in my recent life.

IF she allowed comments but then removed them, THEN you would have more justification for being upset at her for not allowing them. But to start right off the bad, providing a very comprehensive fact based video and denying comments from the start knowing full well that they weren't going to be helpful... it's just not the same thing.
Reply
:iconthatmexicanuzer:
Thatmexicanuzer Featured By Owner Mar 14, 2013
I believe we are in very different sides of the argument. I suggest we drop it before it gets out of hand
Reply
Add a Comment: