Thoughts, ramblings and other stuff

I think that films and TV made me used to male buts being on display that I assumed that's what all the media does. But films and TV learned that pandering to female viewers is important (mostly TV - since more women watch scripted shows) for success. Of course pandering with great character development would be preferable everywhere.

This episode of Tropes vs Women in Video Games comes with the Content Warning: This educational episode contains graphic sexual and violent game footage and it is very true. After a while it become hard to watch. Other tropes annoy me more from the storytelling point of view but this is visually most disgusting.

I had so many things happening recently I just didn't notice before that Anita Sarkeesian made another video in the Tropes vs Women in Video Games series. It touches my most hated trope - the one that treats being female as character trait. Like being a woman was a personality - this is especially visible in anything affected by Smurfette syndrome but this video made me realise Ms. Male Character is not free of this. And the stereotypes it creates hurt whether you hate bows (not even as a little girl) and pink (blue was my favourite colour since I can remember and that's 3 or 4 years old) or you love them (they are still not your defining traits and certainly not what makes one a woman).

I fucking love science is on youtube now. I liked it on facebook long ago and then watched it explode. I love the pictures and links to science news it provides. I admire Elise for not only producing so much content but also not giving up when it was revealed she was woman and she had to deal with the standard abuse women get on the internet (somehow even the fact that people assumed you were a man can lead to name calling and science and cursing is not for girls and don't forget to discuss her level of attractiveness to you). I remember being surprised IFLS was run by just one person - I was sure there were more. I'm even more in awe now that she started to branch out to new media.

Second part of Anita Anita Sarkeesian's Damsel in Distress of Tropes vs Women in Video Games is out (and working now). Beware - a lot of disturbing images of violence against women characters.



As part in parentheses implied it already has been attacked. The comments and ratings are off so instead it was flagged and taken off by youtube for about an hour. And of course all the comments that cannot be posted underneath go around the web, especially on the gamer sites, generally proving all she says about the prevalent misogynistic attitudes getting reinforced. The comments are perfect examples of all Luke McKinney wrote in Cracked's 5 Gamer Comments That Give Straight White Guys a Bad Name. I have special hatred for the number 2 because, really, is it so hard to understand not everything is about you but you can find them all underneath his post too. Proving his point with every whine. Who needs to look for citations when they just come to you.

Since it looks like we cannot go without fail for even few days I present to you the newest one. Booth babes need not apply is a piece by Joe Peacock who joined all the people who decided the will put borders around the geek community and start charge admittance. To girls. Pretty girls. Because how dare they do things we enjoy without making their whole lives about it.

John Scalzi wrote a pretty good rebuttal that sums nicely what is wrong with that whole attitude. Anyone who made an effort to dress-up and paid for entrance already made an effort to join the experience. They may not do it again. They may not be a greatest fan. But they came for the experience and screaming that your are doing this wrong and get of my lawn is not helping. If people are showing interest in what you like the proper response isn't "you are not good enough". (I'm not talking about the actual hired models - which is what the 'booth babes' term usually refers to - because that's not what this article talks about)

I do snicker at newbies (especially when they tell about that great new thing they discovered that I've known for years) and I get the frustration of when people who barley touched on some subject became centre of attention because they are flashy (or pretty). But this attitude of being somehow robbed of the enjoyment by people who are not as obsessed is doing harm to us all. It implies we should test everyone (by everyone I, of course, mean pretty women) in our secret knowledge before they can cross the bridge to enter our playground (I say ours even though I am a girl but I could probably pass just by not being pretty and thin enough). Not that that playground was ever ours - it was always authors and companies' product - only noone else used to be interested. The things we enjoy are made for everyone and now everyone are enjoying it. It became the mainstream of popular culture (not mine - nihilistic_kid repeats it for this occasion). And maybe Joe Peacock is right and they are just there because it is popular and therefore they'll get a lot of attention. Why is it so awful? Isn't that validation of what we always said? Thing we like are awesome and for everyone to enjoy. Let them enjoy as much of the experience as they are willing to participate in. Hope they get nice memories.

One of my favourite experiences was sharing my love of sf and fantasy. I made my brother start reading books by giving hi fantasy and he used my books to get his now wife to date him. I mad my own, real life, Malazan Reading Cult by sharing my books with friends and family. Even if they never got as into it as me or gave it up when they got families and jobs and less time but it is a shared experience we can all remember with fondness. It is much better then screaming you are fake so get out and never come again. And then suspecting every girl they just doing it for attention.

We already had this with gaming and the whole Felicia Day thing. Now, the debate moved to the general geekdom showing that deep ingrained sexism that insinuates that not only pretty girls have to prove they are geeks they also have to prove they are not doing it only to impress boys. This is especially grating in this context - cosplaying in Comic-Con - as women get judged if their bodies are not good enough and then get this if they are. This kind of behaviour doesn't really affect the ones who are not into it. It makes it awful to all the women who really do care but I constantly expected to prove they are not fake. Because they might be spies infiltrating geekdom to make geek boys stare at them instead of non-fake pretty girls in costumes. Apparently, this is how women decide their worth.

The only good thing about this was showing the existing, deeply sexist, undercurrents in geek culture and hopefully all the discussions will start shifting the attitudes to something less disturbing. At least, a little. One can hope, right?