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:
