Anita Sarkeesian is not the mouth-piece of feminism in gaming, and nor should she be. That’s not to say I completely and vehemently disagree with absolutely everything she says. Indeed, some of her arguments are well-founded and presented. The issue, which many a studious observer has already pointed out, is that Sarkeesian focuses on the sensationalist to drive home her point, makes errors in her analyses, and, on occasion, misleads her viewers.
As with other forms of serious entertainment, video games need to come under close scrutiny to ensure studios, developers and publishers make more informed decisions and grow as an industry. Generally speaking, however, the gaming community deserves a better class of video game critics and reviewers to guide the industry.
The debate currently rages on over the legitimacy of video game journalists and their integrity. Corruption in journalism is immediately dismissed, as expected, by those individuals charged with doing so, who plead innocence like guilty school children hauled up in front of the headmaster. Over the years, the relationship between publishers and gaming journalists has been called into contention, ad naseum, with journalists proving entirely impervious to the angry fist-shaking and finger pointing around them.
While some of the arguments about unhealthy relationships between video game publishers and journalists are certainly compelling, perhaps we need to look at the situation from a different perspective. Regardless of whether these journalists are indeed corrupt shysters, unwilling to accept their mea culpa, there’s clearly a divide between the service gamers expect from these critics and the service they are actually getting. Now standing as a PR-driven monolith, many believe games journalism no longer does what it initially set out to accomplish - report, accurately and objectively, on video games.
Recently, however, longstanding suspicions of ethical misconduct and lackluster practices have intensified, particularly in the wake of the industry’s handling of feminist and video game critic Anita Sarkeesian.
The Hive Mind of Games Journalists
In discussing Sarkeesian’s work, journalists have gushed over every aspect of the Tropes vs Women in Video Games series, episodes of which have been uploaded onto her “Feminist Frequency” YouTube channel. Most of these pieces focus on the bile and abuse that has been thrown at Sarkeesian, at the same time, ignoring many of the legitimate concerns raised by her rational detractors. Here’s just a small fraction of these types of articles:
- Tropes vs Anita Sarkeesian: on passing off anti-feminist nonsense as critique (New Statesman)
- Anita Sarkeesian is Helping Usher In Next Wave of Games, Criticism (GameFront)
- Feminist Take on Games Draws Crude Ridicule, Massive Support (Wired)
- Criticism of Anita Sarkeesian & “Tropes Vs. Women” Comes in 4 Groundless Forms (Bustle)
- Comprehensively addressing the stupid, intellectually dishonest critique of Anita Sarkeesian (Boing Boing)
- The Most Dangerous Woman in Videogames - Anita Sarkeesian (The Escapist)
However, for a truly extensive round-up of the game journalists’ groupthink approach, Gamasutra has provided the following informative article: This Week in Video Game Criticism: Tropes vs Anita Sarkeesian and the Demise of ‘Gamers’.
Let’s just take a look at a select few of these articles…
Bustle‘s Chris Tognotti recently took the criticism issued by Sarkeesian’s detractors and systemically rejected every single point of contention; like a hostage suffering from Stockholm Syndrome, Tognotti appeared to accept all of Sarkeesian’s works, unquestioningly. Describing her videos as “awesome,” the author starts out his article by concluding a relationship between 4Chan‘s “nefarious involvement” and #GamerGate.
Bustle‘s article then goes on to label all of Sarkeesian’s critics as misogynists. Quoting some of the morally reprehensible opinions articulated by YouTuber “MundaneMatt,” Tognotti almost seems to attribute this type of deplorable viewpoint to the gaming community as a whole - a tenet I’m sure many will consider baseless and somewhat insulting.
He then goes on to say that Sarkeesian does not need to play video games to identify plot tropes and sexist elements within video games, adding “It’s not like reading a book - even watching a video of somebody else playing a game is all the proximity you need to analyze its themes.”
While this position is arguably true, it certainly helps to have a history and familiarity with video games; the more games you play, the better equipped you are to take on the lofty task of assessing the perceived pervasiveness of sexism in those titles.
If you have not played a game through to its conclusion, it’s also hard to comprehensively judge the title’s storyline, characters and underlying themes. However, if Sarkeesian has watched someone else play through the campaigns of the games she investigates - which would require a huge investment of time over the short period she has been making her videos - then her “non-gamer” status would, indeed, have little bearing on her critique.
The New Statesman‘s Ian Steadman favored a slightly different modus operandi. Steadman briefly outlines many of the points made by Bustle and others, claiming Sarkeesian’s critics were spewing “anti-feminist nonsense.” He then proceeds to spend much of his time focusing on the online abuse that she has been the victim of.
Steadman makes the point that Sarkeesian was perfectly entitled to make a large sum of money from her Kickstarter campaign, from which she made almost $160,000. Some have, quite rightly, argued that this presents a conflict of interests.
Sarkeesian is effectively producing her feminist vids in exchange for money. It’s fair to say, she has made a living from discussing feminist issues, and it remains financially beneficial for her to continue uncovering, what she considers to be, an endless stream of misogynistic and sexist faux pas strewn throughout video game culture. Unquestionably, dealing with the feminist plight is Sarkeesian’s professional raison d’être. Although this doesn’t immediately invalidate her arguments - just as being a “gamer” doesn’t make an individual’s opinion on games inconsequential - it does mean we should take extra care to make sure she is being entirely fair and grounded in her analysis.
I can’t say I necessarily disagree with the underlying intentions behind the article produced GameFront’s Phil Hornshaw. Hornshaw correctly points out that the industry must strive to “… become more legitimate as a medium of expression and artistic enrichment (as well as ‘fun’)” He also calls for game developers to take a more introspective look at the way women are depicted in their titles. While I largely agree with these points, I also acknowledge that developers demonstrate a penchant for misrepresenting both sexes.
I don’t think anybody could deny that some female characters are hypersexualized and shoehorned into the “damsel” cliché. Equally, however, we must confront some of the unsavory tropes associated with male video game characters, who are sometimes portrayed as über-violent thugs and made to assume the role of clichéd “villain.” That’s not to say these character types absolutely cannot be included in video games; developers just need to focus on writing them convincingly and making sure their existence isn’t jarring to the overall experience. This should also extend beyond just character writing, and the themes and plot points should also benefit from this added attention.
Let’s give some of the developers a little credit, though. For every poorly written/designed video game character, there’s a handful of strong and well-crafted male and female leads; we just need to celebrate these examples more often.
Ultimately, Sarkeesian has a tendency to obtain “Let’s Play” footage circulating on the Internet, chop said material into bite-sized chunks of “sexist” material and then offer her damning appraisal. In repeatedly labeling certain aspects of games misogynistic, she infers that some of the development teams have some sort of deep-seated contempt for women. In turn, this inflammatory language stirs animosity and division between two camps - the “feminists” and the “gamers” - who should actually be working with one another to improve the medium.
A Campaign of Online Harassment
Alas, over the past few weeks, a minority of gamers seem hell-bent on damaging the community’s reputation by splurging inane, crass and vitriolic rhetoric onto messages boards, forums, and article comments sections.
Of course, the Internet is filled with the negativity, pessimism and misanthropy that would make a Game of Thrones baddie blush; this, however, is besides the point. Such actions have derailed the primary argument, allowing video game journalists to almost exclusively focus on the level of harassment and abuse directed towards the likes of Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian; and, being perfectly honest, the abhorrent nature of the remarks directed against the pair has become legitimately newsworthy. It’s just incredibly unfortunate that these journos have, yet again, been given an excuse to dodge the cogent arguments formed to counter some of Sarkeesian’s more questionable statements.
It’s perhaps fair to say that most outlets have dogmatically fixated on the harassment angle, with many going on to suggest that there is some sort of “gamer club” setting out to exclude certain minorities. Frankly, these condescending pieces - created by all and sundry, who consider themselves part of a “progressive” bubble of games journalism - consist of unoriginal, recycled material that added little to the debate; never have I seen such a closed off discussion, fuelled by so few arguments.
The Other Side
It becomes an increasingly tedious affair when trying to find a media outlet willing to offer some sort of reprisal on Sarkeesian’s analyses - even if it’s just a short paragraph. What we have seen in the last few weeks is a remarkably narrow-minded, singular perspective on the topic at hand, as opposed to a healthy, level-headed debate that explored both sides of the argument.
It’s difficult to consolidate the unilateral support shown for Sarkeesian’s work among video game journalists versus the widespread disapproval expressed by the very people reading their warped opinion pieces. Perhaps this harks back to the disconnect seen between gamers and the people entrusted to analyze contemporary video game issues?
Maybe it’s the mere mention of the term “feminism” that has deterred critical thinking across the board, with journalists petrified they will be slapped with an anti-progressive label? I have some news for you, journalists; you can still be pro-feminist and disagree with at least some of the points raised by feminists.
Let’s be clear. Sarkeesian may get some things wrong, but she doesn’t deserve the torrent of abuse leveled against her. Don’t agree? Fine, but ad hominem attacks and disgusting rape threats - as if it really needs pointing out - isn’t just morally wrong, it belittles whatever argument you were trying to get across in the first place. Sarkeesian has compiled an extensive list of vile and sexist comments hurled in her direction. While I don’t believe these malignant characters are a true representation of the gaming community’s ethos, it is certainly time for some of the more ignorant quarters of the population to accept that there is a problem with cyber-bullying that desperately needs addressing.
Sadly, this also means the coherent and considered approaches adopted by many rational, pro-feminist gamers have largely been ignored by the mainstream media, quite deliberately, in a bid to support their own skewed stance.
Here are just a few of the impassioned and articulate voices you will rarely find portrayed by the mainstream media:
I don’t agree with absolutely all of the points made in the afore-shown vids, just like I don’t disagree with all of Sarkeesian’s proclamations, but I’m at least willing to show that two sides of the argument exist. This is what a proper debate should be about. Listening to a contention with a critical ear and weighing up its merits and weaknesses. It’s perhaps time to rethink one’s stance when making kneejerk reactions that leads to the wholesale dismissal of the opposition’s viewpoint. Unfortunately, many games journalists have failed to cast a wary eye on Sarkeesian’s work, leading to an overwhelmingly bland and predictable slew of pro-PC articles that fail to deviate from the status quo and unthinkingly extol her every word.
Just as video games are not beyond reasoned criticism, neither is Sarkeesian. Blindly accepting all of her points as gospel truths, regardless of merit, is almost as dangerous as the Internet trolls’ subversive attempts to silence video game critics; if we go along this path, it’s entirely plausible that storytelling in games may head in the wrong direction and suffer as a consequence.
#GamerGate Born from a Disenfranchised Community?
#GamerGate was largely born from people’s frustrations with the current standard of video games journalism. When an unbalanced and unfair picture of a particular community’s passion or hobby is presented, its members are bound to react en masse. This took the form of #GamerGate - a campaign that, according to The Guardian writer Keith Stuart, calls for “… more transparency and better ethics in games journalism.”
Although #GamerGate has been used by many civilized gamers to embark upon a good cause, the hashtag has also been hijacked by some of the toxic trolls responsible for harassing the likes of Sarkeesian and Depression Quest developer Zoe Quinn.
This also led to the predictable. Gamers call out video game journalists on their practices and demand more accountability; video game journalists respond by blaming gamers, lumping their dissenting readership into the category of “misogynists,” and marginalizing those who dare to disagree.
Worse still, many reporters, in hypocritical fashion, resorted to the same infantile name-calling tactics they have been so busy decrying. Gamers have been described as “obtuse s-tslingers” (Leigh Alexander, writing on Gamasutra), “entitled whiny crybabies” (Uproxx‘s Dan Seitz), “s-tlords” (The Guardian/PCGamer‘s Tom Hatfield). The petty schoolyard insults were complemented by prejudicial assumptions that those individuals complaining were white, male heterosexuals, desperately trying to preserve their withering masculinity.
This rift widened when a sizable contingent of game journalists threw a collective hissy fit and, rather foolishly, decided it was time to press the big red button. This breathtaking spectacle has been aptly documented by Slate‘s David Auerbach:
The attacks on the press have ranged from well-reasoned to offensive to paranoid, but the gaming journalists unwisely decided to respond to the growing, nebulous anger by declaring that “gamers” were dead. Such articles appeared concurrently in Gamasutra(“ ‘Gamers’ are over” and “A guide to ending ‘gamers’ ”), Destructoid (“There are gamers at the gate, but they may already be dead”), Kotaku (“We might be witnessing the ‘death of an identity’ ”) and Rock, Paper, Shotgun (“Gamers are over”), as well as Ars Technica (“The death of the ‘gamers’ ”),Vice (“Killing the gamer identity”) and BuzzFeed (“Gaming is leaving ‘gamers’ behind”).
Auerbach then goes on to describe the afore-mentioned articles as follows:
“They are unconvincing, lacking in hard evidence, and big on wishful thinking. A good number of them link to an obscure blog post by academic Dan Golding, ‘The End of Gamers,’ which argues, again without evidence, that ‘the gamer identity has been broken’ and that the current unrest ‘is an attempt to retain hegemony.'”
He concludes his piece by arguing that the gaming press is, in part, frustrated by their ever-shrinking audience share, with members leaving for higher quality, enthusiast gaming outlets and YouTube critics.
Perhaps the following, somewhat depressing, GIF summarizes the community’s current level of disdain and distrust for video games journalism?
I’m being flippant, of course.
Are Some Gaming Outlets Changing Their Policies?
What Culture’s Jordan Ephraim does an admirable job of summarizing what #GamerGate started out to achieve, and the response it elicited:
“It’s not about gender at all, actually. People have flooded the #GamerGate tag on Tumblr and especially Twitter, strawmanning by claiming that GamerGate is merely a group of misogynists that are unhappy with women in video games. To anyone who’s actually examined the issue, this couldn’t be further from the truth. In fact, observations found no blatantly misogynistic tweets or Tumblr posts, what we did see were laments from gamers who are sick to death with being demonised by mainstream media sites.”
While big gaming outlets have vehemently condemned #GamerGate, the hashtag has picked up traction and gained support from a diverse range of people; this includes men and women of various ages and races, as well as feminist groups. The Fine Young Capitalists, an organization that promotes females in the game development industry, pledged their support to the cause, along with a number of video game developers. Pro-feminist Christina Hoff Sommers also entered the fray and sent out the following tweet:
“Most gamers seem to support equality feminism. What they reject is today’s male-bashing, propaganda drive, female chauvinism. #GamerGate.”
A spinoff hashtag, #NotYourShield, was then formed to address the media’s shameful response to #GamerGate. Minorities of different ages, sexes, races and backgrounds came together to protest the coordinated attacks launched by video game journalists themselves, as well as their repeated attempts to hide behind certain groups to avoid accusations of corruption.
The hashtags, along with some rather tenacious redditors, even forced some sites to alter their practices, showing that the community’s “conspiracies” were not as far-fetched as previously suggested. Two of the biggest gaming-centric websites, Kotaku and Polygon, revised their policies on how staffers could intermingle with developers. The move was seemingly made after concrete evidence surfaced on reddit, revealing affiliations between Kotaku and Polygon writers and the developers whose products they were reviewing.
With Kotaku‘s journalistic integrity called into disrepute, the outlet’s editor-in-chief, Stephen Totilo, was galvanized into action:
“The last week has been, if nothing else, a good warning to all of us about the pitfalls of cliquishness in the indie dev scene and among the reporters who cover it. We’ve absorbed those lessons and assure you that, moving ahead, we’ll err on the side of consistent transparency on that front, too.”
“We’ve also agreed that funding any developers through services such as Patreon introduce needless potential conflicts of interest and are therefore nixing any such contributions by our writers.”
Meanwhile, Polygon‘s editor-in-chief, Christopher Grant, released the following statement:
“While I disagree that contributing to a game developer without holding an actual financial stake in their success is a violation of the spirit of that principle, I also think that disclosure is the best medicine in these circumstances. So starting immediately, I’ve asked everyone on staff to disclose on their staff pages any outstanding Patreon contributions and, additionally, to disclose the same on any coverage related to those contributions under that staff member’s byline. We’ll retroactively update any stories published in the duration of that support to reflect that, and I’ll note those updates here.”
What’s disturbing is that, without the super-sleuths of the gaming community, these revelations may never have surfaced. It’s only when the gaming press was “caught out,” and irrefutable proof was exposed, that liability was accepted.
In stark contrast, The Escapist provided an incredibly interesting insight into the ups and downs of video game journalism, emphasizing the struggles many professional outlets face in this modern world. The website went on to offer a candid apology for its own journalistic indiscretions, before vowing to shore up its ethical standards and increase transparency:
“Our editor-in-chief, Greg Tito, having reviewed the facts at hand, concluded we ourselves have been imperfect in maintaining journalistic standards. A particularly problematic article, the one which generated his review, was about the alleged harassment of an indie developer by a forum community which denied the allegations but was itself victimized as a result of them. The article failed to cite the harassment as alleged, failed to give the forum community an opportunity present its point of view, and did not verify the claims or secure other sources. Mr. Tito has personally updated the article and spoken to all our editors about the importance of adhering to standards that will prevent such bad incidents from happening again. We, as a team, apologize for this error, both to our readers and to the forum community that suffered as a result. I, personally, apologize for this error, as well.”
It’s surprising it’s taken this long for a handful of gaming websites to understand some of the most fundamental principles of ethics in journalism. Peculiarly, even when these basics are emphasized by the community, Christopher Grant still does not believe “contributing to a game developer” is a serious violation of these ethics.
A Growing Entertainment Industry
Personally, I don’t think there is any concerted, sexist agenda among video game developers. However, with the video games industry still a relatively emerging form of entertainment - relative to books, movies, music, etc. - some of the scripting and plot points of certain games remain unevolved. Some games rely upon the same worn, clichéd tropes that are found in other types of entertainment, and some formulaic elements do bleed through into those titles, primarily because those same tropes are so prevalent in other aspects of storytelling. While much of this issue revolves around unrefined scriptwriting, which adversely affects both male and female characters, the problem is worsened by marketing strategies designed to appeal to the execs’ outdated impression of the “gamer.”
Ultimately, many are now tired of hearing that someone else’s repugnant comments are symptomatic of a deep-rooted problem that plagues their pastime. Even before the tumult of recent events, Kristin Bezio of the Learned Fangirl managed to encapsulate the community’s increasing disillusionment:
“Painting a picture of the gaming community as cruel, misogynistic, violence-prone basement dwellers is not helping with viewing gaming through the lens of rationality. It also alienates those gamers who are genuinely nice people. And further alienates feminist gamers as ‘White Knights’ (people who will defend female gamers at all costs, no matter how wrong they are) rather than reasonable human beings with respect for all.”
Above all else, this whole protracted and ugly affair should serve as a lesson to everyone. It’s time to stop disruptive trolls from hijacking websites, endlessly churning out hatred and threats; it’s time for video game journalists to listen to the very people that made them successful, rather than blaming and marginalizing them; and it’s time for the community to move away from sensationalist gaming websites that stubbornly refuse to stamp out unethical practices. it’s time for change.