Well, I wasn't talking about you, specifically, but hey here we go anyway.
Yeah, I do think her gender has a lot to do with why people are so quick to shit all over her. Evidence: every other woman who calls this shit out being harassed much more frequently than men who do the same.
It's not every, or, indeed, any woman's job to convince you that you're wrong. Even with that in mind, though, she stood up and has voluntarily put herself directly in the line of fire to educate people about the most basic of the basics of feminism by citing concrete examples of problematic tropes. It's literally just a list of things! "[thing] happens sometimes, it hurts because [reason], now here's a short list of examples." She's not doing a deep dive here. That people are so upset about this most surface level of critiques speaks volumes.
I don't give a fuck if sometimes she's wrong about something. Because she's usually not. It's utterly absurd to think that just because you don't have to kill the strippers in Hitman she's being a manipulative and dishonest woman.
Also yeah it IS just about men accepting. Listen to those who are saying they're being harmed by something. Don't dismiss them outright. I'd say the same thing if it were about race or sexuality or nonbinary genders or transgender people or neurodivergence. I don't care if you're one of the good ones because you respect women and know they're so strong and independent and wonderful. None of that is relevant in the slightest. You're still being nitpicky about something that doesn't need it and certainly doesn't want it.
My apologies, but I won't acknowledge or accept the double standard here. If I am to accept and empathize her POV without question, I could very well say the same about about my own POV to you. Simply empathize and accept that some don't see this as the problem that she (and I'm guessing by extension, you) do.
I just want a fair discussion based on the presumption that both sides need proof. I'm not arguing that Anita's overarching message is invalid or fabricated, but that she's done a poor job backing up her own points. Where as I feel the opposite perspective job has done a pretty effective job of countering her points. It's as simple as that.
There's nothing wrong with debating any points she has, but most of her stuff is incredibly basic. It's even to the point where I'm not sure what's so controversial if you understand basic feminist ideas. Calling her out as being dishonest is raising some red flags though. I'd like to know what specific points she's been dishonest about, along with sources you feel fairly criticize her points. It's been quite a long time since I've watched her videos, and haven't watched any of her recent content, so I'm honestly a bit curious.
No one is telling them what they can or can't enjoy. It's about people (men) understanding the issues here, and maybe trying to feel some empathy for the women effected by this. At least initially. You may not think sexist content has a negative effect on people, but you have women (some in this very thread!) saying this content bothers them. Sometimes enough to skip entire games they would otherwise play. When you come in here and say you'll keep buying these games because it doesn't bother you, it's kind of a slap in the face. Ignoring what actual women are saying because you think that your opinion is correct is a little, you know, sexist.
So I think we have a difference of opinion on a key point of this discussion.
I am
okay with the concept of offensive material existing. Since obviously, offensive material is subective, we have to presume that most content has the potential of being offensive to someone. Conversely, most content is similarly likely to not be offensive. You can't pigeon hole the entire population in to either or, you have to expect that there is a mixture of both sides.
So I am not saying that women don't have the right to find something offensive, you are mistaken on that front. They are perfectly well within their right to voice their opinions and their offense, and ultimately, speak with their wallet and if they are the majority, it will probably have an effect on the performance of said thing amongst the reception of the general populous.
However, if not everyone finds it offensive, then that would indicate there is a market, and that market is free to indulge if they so choose, and as long as they do, the corner of the industry that abuses it will likely continue to thrive and be fed the dollars they aspire for by creating such female characters.
Women are not a minority in gaming, by the way. If the massive majority of women spoke with their wallet, it would be felt. I want to sort of illustrate here that it cannot simply be solely men who are responsible for the continuing of this trend.
Where it begins to become an issue, I think, is when the argument becomes that games like these, or characters like these, shouldn't exist because it's offensive, I see that as basically blocking freedom of expression through games as a form of art, no matter how juvenile you find that art to be.
