You know, this was my exact same thoughts :)

But as I said above, you are assuming and taking as fact that straight males = all or most gamers. And that therefore all games must always cater for their desires and fantasies, as you envision them, and you're arguing with anyone else's view that challenges that. That other groups of gamer than straight male exist and are posting alternative viewpoints to your own - and here, I'd say we're in a majority with our views, interestingly - should tell you that you're wrong.

I'm not sure what to say back about me bringing sexism into this topic. The topic and discussion is related to sexism against women in games...

And it's so easy for publishers or anyone making money to keep tapping the same market. That doesn't in any way prove that there are no other markets, or that those other markets should shut up and never expect any product to cater to them. It just shows that money makers have no imagination and take as few risks as possible. Anything different or untried is a risk. It's a self fulfilling prophecy that something that doesn't exist won't sell, but it's not proof that it wouldn't sell if it were made. It's an assumption, and it comes across as you devaluing what other people want because they are not you.

What? That was a movie for men? Two pretty hot studs fighting each other for fun seemed like something girls would enjoy.

Btw. I've seen most of her videos now and they are mostly pretty good. Of course there are some flaws and bad examples, but everybody makes them.

What was really disturbing for me though, was to see every video she made is being constantly voted down, reported, and if only comments are avaible, they are expressing their hatred towards Anita. That counts for video responses for her videos as well (I mean the comment section).

I know Youtube comments are the biggest trashcan of the Internet, but damn. So much harrassement, hatespeech and everything because she makes some videos about games?

Makes me sick.

Well, bye bye baby. Try for reading comprehension next time. But what the shit, I'll sing you a little lullaby once again: There's money to be made from more than one audience at a time.

Yeah, this movie was kinda gay-torture-porn but the way the world is descripted in the movie, being about men loosing their masculinity, being wussed by society and feeling the freedom after kicking the shit out of each other being a remark to original traits of masculinity. Not to mention there are hardly any women in the movie and most of them are just fuck toys above everything else. Or maybe there's just one woman? I don't remember more.

This movie really is targeted to men and some women (my gf included) seem to enjoy it by accident - not because of the story or anything, but because of Eddie Norton and Braddie Pitt in their bromance.

...I like living on the edge? :D Besides, it was more for the mental imagery of skyscrapers blowing up than the movie's content. :P

Assets are not unlimited. If a company is willing to use 100mln dollars on a game, it will be one game only, to appeal to the most profitable market. And when they do it and start counting profits, they will rather make another game similar to the other than risk the money they have on something new. That's a problem, because I would like big companies to experiment more, but hey.

In a real world, you can't eat a cookie and have a cookie.

*enters room*
Hey HMDK, what's u-- what the, are you summoning demons in here?
You have doomed us all!

Because of the same reason you can't be a female in Uncharted or a male in Tomb Raider. Those are characters that have certain backstories that add a different twist to the storyline. Outside of RPGs , you don't really see that many games that allow you to create or customise your character.
Yes , but every woman that disrespects men can be considered a real woman. Two words: BS!
And here's proof: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JA4EPRbWhQ
This is where all this hypocricy comes from. We talk about an age of equal rights (in most countries [democratic countries]) , but yet we talk about how women had fewer rights in the PAST!

My goodness, this thread grew quite fast since I last saw it. I tried to read most of it, but I will admit I skimmed some areas rather quickly, so apologies if I am repeating any old debates/topics.

I have quite a few problems with these videos, although I am not going to touch on all of them here or else this will turn into a giant wall of text. One problem is that these videos are little more than rants with no real information to them. The videos are too narrowly focused to have any real value. Yes, they list games that she believes to carry these tropes and perpetuate violence against women, but that is about it. She hardly touches on why things are this way, other than implying lazy writers or a purposeful, systematic oppression of women by men. I feel there are larger social and cultural issues at play that need to be discussed, and as much as people do not want to admit it, that some of these tropes can be traced to a hard-wiring by nature regarding genders and what we expect from each other.

Someone also previously mentioned female writers who create similar stories, and I feel this is a very valid point. These videos seem to assume all these tropes are terrible and women are tired of them. What it fails to recognize is that many women do appreciate these stories as well, and are often the creators of them. For example, the male hero rescuing the kidnapped princess/girlfriend/wife/whatever. Many women view this as a type of romantic fantasy, seeing that someone loves the girl enough to go through hell to reach her. It also strikes women on a more instinctual level of wanting to be protected as a means of survival. While the world and how we live has changed quite a bit, those instincts still exist on a subconscious level.

Sarkeesian is making this a very black and white issue and not touching on larger issues that influence and surround these tropes. Violence against women is a very serious topic and one I wholly support being a woman myself, but these videos are doing very little for the cause other than throwing out random statistics and a list of video games that match a few tropes.

That guy is hilarious, I loved his Thomas Aquinas is a dumbass (something like that) video. Sir Thomas Dumbass Aquinas, LMAO

Perhaps unfortunately, we are provably not.

Sure, we have some overlap, but we are fundamentally different in a lot of aspects for one reason or another.

I say screw the differences, we're all living beings. equal dignity and respect for all!

I think, maybe things just go in a circle:
Most "hardcore" videogames are aimed at a male audience, so they get advertised that way, they get gifted to sons (and not daughters), then boys/men then talk to each other about it and so on. By aiming this stuff at men, you create a male audience. You then cater to this audience (because you KNOW they will buy) and create more stuff tailored to them. And so on.

And when men then meet a gaming woman/girl they point out again and again how rare and special that is which again strengthens the feeling that the games are for men.

I personally (which of course is not representative) found that when I showed my female friends different games there would always be some kind they liked. They just never thought of trying them out. They didn't feel that they were also made for them.
But when they played them they liked them.

Am i the only one in here , who don't have any problems with Anita and her videos ?