Anita Sarkeesian and Women in Video Games

I said that sexism doesn't effect men the same way it does women, that doesn't mean that it's not as bad or serious as sexism against women. Sexism against women is, however, more deeply seeded into our society and culture- video games included. I actually don't have a problem with the "ideal" woman being portrayed in games, a little bit of sexual titillation isn't necessarily a bad thing. I would certainly never advocate that games be sexually repressive, I don't think most feminist gamers actually do. As far as characterization is concerned, my opponent is correct, in most cases it's quite equal. When it comes to objectification, however, females have it harder than males[1]. The problem is largely the lack of variety and the fact that most female characters in video games only serve as objects to be won, gawked at or to further emphasize the male hero in some way[1][2]. Ironically, some of my opponent's own counter-examples fall into these categories; Lara Croft is largely considered to be one of the biggest sex symbols in gaming despite her creator's intentions[4], Samus has also been portrayed as shallowly written and dependent on male characters (I'm looking at you, Other M!)[5][6], and sex is generally treated immaturely as some kind of prize in the Mass Effect series, degrading everyone involved. The same applies to most female characters in games, this and the fact that the gaming industry tries to appeal to the white, heterosexual male audience is evidence enough that females are portrayed the way they are to reinforce male sexual and self-image fantasies for male players. In case my opponent has any objections to the idea that the industry's mainly focused on appealing to males than females, I'd like to point out the fact that most main, playable characters in game are male. The ridiculous ideas and representations of what masculinity is in gaming is indeed a real problem that has real life consequences on men, but it is not the same problem nor equal to the problems associated with the portrayals of female characters. My opponent is only partially correct about women and employment; while there have certainly been improvements, women still face harassment, lower pay, and discrimination on both conscious and unconscious levels. I don't want to stray too far away from video games or Sarkeesian, but it's necessary in order to illustrate how engraved sexism is in our society. Women don't fair well making it to higher-level management; only 4% of S&P 500's CEO's are female, just over 10% are chief financial officers[7] and over one third of public companies don't even have senior officers who are women[8]. Women also do not make as much as men do, on average males make $7,600 more than women- that's according to Congress' economic fact sheet[9]. I appreciate my opponent's recognition of corporations as cold, inhuman and uncaring entities, but the people who run said corporations are very human and possess flaws like any other person.I can't answer my opponent because I honestly don't know what Sarkeesian did with the other 140K, and can only assume she used it to better the quality of her videos. My only real argument in defense of the amount of money Sarkeesian had made is that she didn't ask for the amount she got and that the people who gave her the money did so freely. As stated in the last round, and in the sources provided, the cost of making a video varies depending on what kind of video is being made and it's quality. Anita's series isn't even finished yet, so it's impossible to determine how much money she's using producing them. I believe my opponent is implying that Sarkeesian might be scamming the people who donated to her videos, but unless he can provide proof it's little more than suspicion based on little to no substantial fact. In regards to the attacks on Sarkeesian being sexist, I'd like to apologize to my opponent. I misinterpreted his position on the last round and never intended to put words into his mouth. Though, now I fear I'm kind of confused by his position. If the threats and insults that were directed at Sarkeesian were in fact directed at the fact she was a woman, then it's obviously sexist. Sexism covers stereotypes and discrimination[10]; just because it's meant to be insulting doesn't make it any less sexist, if anything it makes it more sexist because it's trying to hurt someone's feelings on the basis of their gender. Other than that, I don't really disagree with my opponent on how these kind of behavior is reinforced. I do, however, believe that such behavior has, because of the anonymous nature of the Internet, is in fact fostered. I look forward to my opponent's closing arguments! SOURCES: [1]http://thegamesofchance.blogspot.co.uk...[2]http://www.nytimes.com...;[3](featured video)http://www.youtube.com... [4]http://browse.reticular.info...[5]http://www.g4tv.com...[6]http://www.avclub.com...[7]http://www.bloomberg.com...[8]http://www.catalyst.org...[9]http://www.jec.senate.gov...[10]http://www.merriam-webster.com...