Im going to address some of the questions I saw as I skimmed through and points I saw that incited the most response from me. I used Word, so that's why there are no quotes and only mentions; I'm lazy, deal with it.
1. If a man dies for plot advancement, is it also bad?
This depends on how his death is written and utilised; it also depends on how often it occurs. The deaths of female characters is most frequently written in the ways she describes, and were often subjected to a far more brutal death thats outside of our control. When men die, they typically have a chance to alter the conditions in which its occurring; its more about being a battle for him to overcome (and fail). His death is not often him passively standing by and being shot in the head, and hes rarely asking for it; he makes the choice to do it (fight the battle) or does it at by his own hand with the information presented. Women who die for plot advancement are largely, as said, pawns in a story. You may have some minor development of the character, but youre frequently seeing brutal violence against women. (And yes, there are instances where the women fight back, such as in Hitman: Absolution, but shes immediately restrained again and left weak Even though shes a clone of a girl who was bred to be a top-class assassin, which is conflicting because shes being easily locked up.)
2. [MENTION=922]Alloy[/MENTION]; And about people being convinced about women being the cause of genre violence... Is she serious?
Deadly serious, sadly. And no, the large-scale society doesnt see it as being the fault of the individual brutalising the woman. Think of all the rape cases recently, such as Steubenville. The girl was passed out drunk and boys took advantage of her, filming it; the people supporting these boys blamed her. It was her fault because she was drunk, it was her fault because she was there, it was her fault because she was wearing skimpy clothes, shes a slut, shes a whore, she asked for it. These things were all said. While there may be a large population of people who understand that, regardless of scenario and short of saying Please have sex with me, there is a ridiculously large section of society that views it as being the womans fault because of one of those (or other) reasons. So, no, shes not kidding; shes entirely serious, and this is still a thought process that people have. (Rape, by the way, is defined as violence against women.)
3. [MENTION=5228]Razmos[/MENTION]; that was obviously scripted, I don't even understand what the point she was trying to make there was. So she's part of his bionic arm? so what? that's a good plot twist. doesn't really say anything about the feminist issue.
I think the facepalm is largely due to the whole obvious masturbation joke and that hes quite literally married to his arm. I think the point she was trying to make is that it is a poorly constructed masturbation joke that puts his wife in a place of use for sexual pleasure. (Though, looking at his arm, I wouldnt want that coming near me at all.) Not something I wouldve included had I presented this, but thats another way to look at it.
4. [MENTION=1130]Dusk[/MENTION]; I liked this video better, but I feel that she skates around the issue with extremely excessive violence in video games in general.
I think we had to mention this in the other thread, but this is a form of distraction. Youre distracting from the message at hand (how the damsel trope is tied into presenting violence against women). Shes not addressing general violence at this point; shes addressing the violence against a specified group of people. It would be too much to talk about the entire aspect of violence, which is already something that is being discussed; we see it all the time, so she doesnt need to address it specifically. Heres another way to think of it: If youre writing a paper about Hitlers rise to power affecting the European landscape, youre not going to include how Mussolini rose to power in Italy; their roles mayve been related to the landscape of WWII in Europe, but the two topics are separate. In this instance, shes detailing violence against women; violence is a problem overall, but shes focusing on a specific sub-group. Asking for more is distracting from the topic at hand. This technique, by the way, is often used to discredit the topic being talked about; its saying that its not important enough to address. Since she addresses it at least once (which is good -- it's also something she almost always does when she talks about violence against women; she also addresses it in other videos regarding gender stereotyping), she doesnt need to address it at this point in time. (It's not saying all violence is unimportant, by the way.)
5. [MENTION=1130]Dusk[/MENTION]; Because most gamers are heterosexual men?
Only on a technicality, though demographics of gaming dont mention sexuality (so thats a moot point). So just based on a gender line? Try 47% of gamers are female. And were not all playing casual games or family entertainment. Some of us dont have children to play games with, and were not being forced to do it by our male counterparts; some of us play a larger variety of video games than our more counterparts, to be precise. So stop trying to shoebox us all into some category where you think we belong; were just as diverse as men when it comes to our tastes in entertainment. This website, of all things, should be more understanding of that.
But since you want a bigger breakdown of the games people play, I found this study; I think the title is somewhat misleading, but I'm still skimming the rest of the information. The biggest thing I find is that male gamers tend to prefer violent video games over non-violent; this statistic, when utilised by the gaming industry, could express the amount of video games being developed with that in mind (as women are split in preference, men skew toward one side). But perhaps it could be that it's the a) type of violence of the fact that b) some violence is negligible and irrelevant (gratuitous); this could put women off certain areas of gaming and cause them to lean toward another genre where it is less likely to occur. So, again, just having the statistics doesn't do much. We have the statistics available, but the availability of video games that might interest both parties is severely lacking. This potentially can cause issues with the data.
6. [MENTION=4235]KhainiWest[/MENTION]; Regarding turning off comments, ratings/statistics, and Instead we have hundreds of response video's of which case she ignores, along with any form of communication.
Its not weak to put something online and have your face associated with it. We know who she is and what her name is; we know quite a lot of information about her. Its not weak because you have other methods of contacting her (blog posts, written articles, Tumblr, Twitter and her website, for example) if you want to submit your feedback to her. It would be seen as weaker if she posted it anonymously, with no telling signs of who she is. And since she was spam-flagged, ratings are pointless; the same exact thing would happen. Also, unless your place of residence is inside of Anitas head, you cannot talk about what she does and does not ignore because you have absolutely no clue what she reads or watches outside of the presented material. Even if she doesnt mention it or respond to it (because a lot of it is goading her), she may see it and take into consideration the thoughts presented. It's a logical fallacy to assume information one cannot possibly have.
And because I think people need more of a view of the actual treatment of women in the gaming industry, GBITKs Isolated Incidents is just the tip of the iceberg. They need to finish compiling, but its insanity to read. I can't remember if I linked it last time, so there it is.
1. If a man dies for plot advancement, is it also bad?
This depends on how his death is written and utilised; it also depends on how often it occurs. The deaths of female characters is most frequently written in the ways she describes, and were often subjected to a far more brutal death thats outside of our control. When men die, they typically have a chance to alter the conditions in which its occurring; its more about being a battle for him to overcome (and fail). His death is not often him passively standing by and being shot in the head, and hes rarely asking for it; he makes the choice to do it (fight the battle) or does it at by his own hand with the information presented. Women who die for plot advancement are largely, as said, pawns in a story. You may have some minor development of the character, but youre frequently seeing brutal violence against women. (And yes, there are instances where the women fight back, such as in Hitman: Absolution, but shes immediately restrained again and left weak Even though shes a clone of a girl who was bred to be a top-class assassin, which is conflicting because shes being easily locked up.)
2. [MENTION=922]Alloy[/MENTION]; And about people being convinced about women being the cause of genre violence... Is she serious?
Deadly serious, sadly. And no, the large-scale society doesnt see it as being the fault of the individual brutalising the woman. Think of all the rape cases recently, such as Steubenville. The girl was passed out drunk and boys took advantage of her, filming it; the people supporting these boys blamed her. It was her fault because she was drunk, it was her fault because she was there, it was her fault because she was wearing skimpy clothes, shes a slut, shes a whore, she asked for it. These things were all said. While there may be a large population of people who understand that, regardless of scenario and short of saying Please have sex with me, there is a ridiculously large section of society that views it as being the womans fault because of one of those (or other) reasons. So, no, shes not kidding; shes entirely serious, and this is still a thought process that people have. (Rape, by the way, is defined as violence against women.)
3. [MENTION=5228]Razmos[/MENTION]; that was obviously scripted, I don't even understand what the point she was trying to make there was. So she's part of his bionic arm? so what? that's a good plot twist. doesn't really say anything about the feminist issue.
I think the facepalm is largely due to the whole obvious masturbation joke and that hes quite literally married to his arm. I think the point she was trying to make is that it is a poorly constructed masturbation joke that puts his wife in a place of use for sexual pleasure. (Though, looking at his arm, I wouldnt want that coming near me at all.) Not something I wouldve included had I presented this, but thats another way to look at it.
4. [MENTION=1130]Dusk[/MENTION]; I liked this video better, but I feel that she skates around the issue with extremely excessive violence in video games in general.
I think we had to mention this in the other thread, but this is a form of distraction. Youre distracting from the message at hand (how the damsel trope is tied into presenting violence against women). Shes not addressing general violence at this point; shes addressing the violence against a specified group of people. It would be too much to talk about the entire aspect of violence, which is already something that is being discussed; we see it all the time, so she doesnt need to address it specifically. Heres another way to think of it: If youre writing a paper about Hitlers rise to power affecting the European landscape, youre not going to include how Mussolini rose to power in Italy; their roles mayve been related to the landscape of WWII in Europe, but the two topics are separate. In this instance, shes detailing violence against women; violence is a problem overall, but shes focusing on a specific sub-group. Asking for more is distracting from the topic at hand. This technique, by the way, is often used to discredit the topic being talked about; its saying that its not important enough to address. Since she addresses it at least once (which is good -- it's also something she almost always does when she talks about violence against women; she also addresses it in other videos regarding gender stereotyping), she doesnt need to address it at this point in time. (It's not saying all violence is unimportant, by the way.)
5. [MENTION=1130]Dusk[/MENTION]; Because most gamers are heterosexual men?
Only on a technicality, though demographics of gaming dont mention sexuality (so thats a moot point). So just based on a gender line? Try 47% of gamers are female. And were not all playing casual games or family entertainment. Some of us dont have children to play games with, and were not being forced to do it by our male counterparts; some of us play a larger variety of video games than our more counterparts, to be precise. So stop trying to shoebox us all into some category where you think we belong; were just as diverse as men when it comes to our tastes in entertainment. This website, of all things, should be more understanding of that.
But since you want a bigger breakdown of the games people play, I found this study; I think the title is somewhat misleading, but I'm still skimming the rest of the information. The biggest thing I find is that male gamers tend to prefer violent video games over non-violent; this statistic, when utilised by the gaming industry, could express the amount of video games being developed with that in mind (as women are split in preference, men skew toward one side). But perhaps it could be that it's the a) type of violence of the fact that b) some violence is negligible and irrelevant (gratuitous); this could put women off certain areas of gaming and cause them to lean toward another genre where it is less likely to occur. So, again, just having the statistics doesn't do much. We have the statistics available, but the availability of video games that might interest both parties is severely lacking. This potentially can cause issues with the data.
6. [MENTION=4235]KhainiWest[/MENTION]; Regarding turning off comments, ratings/statistics, and Instead we have hundreds of response video's of which case she ignores, along with any form of communication.
Its not weak to put something online and have your face associated with it. We know who she is and what her name is; we know quite a lot of information about her. Its not weak because you have other methods of contacting her (blog posts, written articles, Tumblr, Twitter and her website, for example) if you want to submit your feedback to her. It would be seen as weaker if she posted it anonymously, with no telling signs of who she is. And since she was spam-flagged, ratings are pointless; the same exact thing would happen. Also, unless your place of residence is inside of Anitas head, you cannot talk about what she does and does not ignore because you have absolutely no clue what she reads or watches outside of the presented material. Even if she doesnt mention it or respond to it (because a lot of it is goading her), she may see it and take into consideration the thoughts presented. It's a logical fallacy to assume information one cannot possibly have.
And because I think people need more of a view of the actual treatment of women in the gaming industry, GBITKs Isolated Incidents is just the tip of the iceberg. They need to finish compiling, but its insanity to read. I can't remember if I linked it last time, so there it is.