Anita Sarkeesian and Women in Video Games

I acknowledge the my opponent's terms. For the sake of common courtesy and debate etiquette I won't be presenting any new arguments. I'd like to thank my opponent for such a great debate! My opponent is, again, only partially correct. Like I said in the previous round, a little bit of titillation isn't a bad thing. We all get sexual urges, and trying to totally suppress it is unhealthy. However, my opponent ignores the human element put into play whenever we see someone attractive, and that noticing someone's flattering appearance is not the same thing as objectifying them. Sure, their appearance might be the first thing we notice, but most of us still understand that what we're looking at is another person and we respect them as such. Unless you're in a strip club or looking at someone who's intentionally showing off their "assets", gawking and treating women like objects is generally frowned upon (and also considered sexist[1]. Also, my opponent's contention that males are supplementary in games with a majority of female characters has little foundation. For one, there are very few games in the industry where a majority of the characters, that's not to say there are some, but it's a terribly low number compared to games with a majority of male characters. Secondly, while arguably a majority do, not every game where a majority of the cast is male puts females in supplementary roles, Alex Vance being my prime example. So you can't automatically assume that it's always the case with males in games where a majority of the characters are female. A secondary character is not always there to only emphasize the main character, in fact sometimes the exact opposite can be true, like in Bioshock: Infinite and The Last of Us. It was definitely not my intention to misrepresent Mass Effect, and I most certainly don't want to be characterized as making the same criticisms of it that FOX News has. So I'll try to better elaborate my position. It wasn't so much the blue side-boob, the sex itself (which wasn't that graphic) or the story, and unlike FOX I firmly believed they had every right to include sex into the game. The problem is that these kind of scenes in games perpetuate the idea that if your friendly and inventive to someone you like that they are somehow obligated to have sex with you, that you're somehow entitled to it[2]. A lot of Bioware's games are kind of like that, opting to treat sex like the equivalent of the "shocking moment" in every Modern Warfare game, basically using it to make their games seem more mature. Mass Effect isn't the only game that's done this, and certainly hasn't done it in the most offensive way. Games like Duke Nuken: Forever and Ride to Hell are some more crude examples; the latter not even attempting to make it look like a parody[3]. My opponent attempts to use Occam's razor to discredit my contention, but misused it by confusing what is pretty well documented evidence as assumptions. Their are few assumptions to be made as far as the existence of sexism within the gaming community is concerned[4][5][6], and while it's true that they market predominantly to a male audience doesn't mean they're intentionally trying to discriminate against women with their games[7]. My opponent isn't wrong when he says that game developers make characters they feel will appeal to their fan base and that they want to see, and that's kind of the problem. Actually, I'd actually argue that the biggest incentive in the tipple-A industry is money, seeing as a lot of the really big titled that are being released (shooters especially) follow formulas just because it's easier, risky and has proved to sell better. What ever the case, it's not an intentional attempt to discriminate or ruin the fun for any one particular group of people (aside from those pesky Commies!). But sadly, despite what their intentions may be, following said generic formula doesn't necessarily make a game appealing or friendly to a female audience. It's that very market-logic that keeps the industry from taking risks and diversifying their characters, and this doesn't just apply to gender... but that's whole other debate. My opponent has decided to skip over most of my contentions in round five, which is alright with me for the sake of sticking to video games. However, the points I made were largely in response to my opponent's points in his second paragraph in round four. He also fails to specify about "nuances" he mentions as between the genders. The fact remains that, while women are becoming more accepted into the workplace, there is still a lot of discrimination as far as getting into upper management and the amount of money they get for how hard they work is concerned[8]. My opponent has made his point quite well; but as I've stated in the previous round, Anita Sarkeesian's video series isn't finished yet and therefore it's impossible to ascertain exactly how much money will be put into it. And seeing as I don't agree with everything Sarkeesian has said, I'm not going to bother defending her character. I'd much prefer to focus of the fact that her fame is the result of the publicity she got courtesy of the people who hate her, that her arguments, while not wholly factual, are based on something that's very true and very important, and the fact that she has the freedom to say whatever she very well pleases in her videos so long as it doesn't violate Youtube's terms of service. I never claimed that her entire critical base was sexist, I honestly don't think they are. In fact, I'd go as far as saying that most of her critics aren't sexist... only a fringe group of trolls and bullies who like to hide behind a computer and type threats and insults when they get defensive. Contrary to my opponent's contention, the sexual and misogynist harassment which followed Sarkeesian's kickstarter have been well documented. Her phone number and address had been posted on hate sites, numerous sexist and vulgar pictures and captioned images of her have been made and distributed online (including photoshopped images of her being raped), her website was hacked, a beat-up game was made where you get to punch her in the face (we covered this already) and people who supported her were threatened[9][10][11]. These were not isolated incidents, there was a very harsh backlash against her from trolls and bullies online after the Kickstarter controversy. There's little doubt that there was a misogynist element within the cyber mob that attacked her. My opponent stated it himself in round four, it wasn't vague. He clearly stated; "If you want to say that the insults were directed at the fact that she's a woman: well of course they were."That's not taken out of context, his reasoning and words are still presented on round four for everyone to see. The people who attacked Sarkeesian clearly directed the bulk of their attack at the fact she was female, and that's clearly sexist. In conclusion, Anita Sarkeesian isn't the epitome of feminism or a representative for all ladies (and guys) who are upset with how women are portrayed in games. Her infamy within the gaming community and all of the exposure and money she gained from it were the result of a very small, but clearly vocal, group of people on the Internet who sexually harassed and threatened her. Because of that, she had become one of the first high profile people to really challenge our community, which isn't a bad thing. The medium of gaming the culture which has sprung up around it is still pretty young, we still have a lot of growing up to do as a community and we shouldn't be ashamed or get defensive over it. Perhaps most important to note is that Anita's videos aren't going to change anything in the industry. The evil feminists aren't trying to take away any games, and Sarkeesian's videos will in no way stop some tipple-a industry from making a game with tons of burly white men in combat armor or cute girls in revealing bikinis with breast physics. My opponent clearly loves video games, I love video games too, and I'm sure many of the readers probably love them as well, but that doesn't mean we can't criticize or acknowledge the negative aspects of them. Again I'd like to thank my opponent for debating with me; it's been fun! SOURCES:[1]http://www.merriam-webster.com...[2]http://www.escapistmagazine.com...[3]videohttp://www.youtube.com...[4]http://www.giantbomb.com...[5]http://www.bbc.co.uk...[6]http://www.adweek.com...[7]videohttp://www.youtube.com...[8]http://www.huffingtonpost.com...[9]http://www.newstatesman.com...[10]http://www.wired.com...[11]http://www.thestar.com...