In so doing, these men have ably demonstrated the point Sarkeesian sought to make all along: that gaming is riddled with misogynistic violence, and that this violence reflects a real-world misogyny rampant within the gaming world.
Remember how everyone’s favorite part of Heath Ledger’s performance in Brokeback Mountain was his almost painful physical repression, his reluctance to express any emotion that wasn’t punching or SHUTTING DOWN? His voice was closed in on itself in a raspy burr — he fell to the ground rather than shed tears — his face was hooded and dark and full of twitching cheek muscles. Kristen Stewart is Heath Ledger, I assure you. She has the same handsome face, the same winsome, masculine smile, the same reluctance to make direct eye contact.
For years, everyone in the world has misunderstood Kristen Stewart’s compressed emotional range. They thought it meant she was a limited actress; it means nothing of the kind. She is John Wayne being forced to play the Maureen O’Hara character. Give her a rail to lean against during a sunset, a military jacket, a toothpick to chew on, and something to squint her eyes against lazily in the distance, and her guardedness will be transformed from unsuccessful femininity to The Great American Male.
It’s time to flush your stereotypes down the drain.
Congratulations, gamer girls—you’re officially at the top of the food chain when it comes to games. A new study released by the Entertainment Software Association has revealed that adult women now occupy the largest demographic in the gaming industry. Women over 18 made up a whopping 36 percent of the gaming population, followed by adult men at 35 percent.
I cannot wait for men to cry about this
You know what I get from this article? I get that the people writing are so concerned about putting others down that even the slightest statistical advantage over someone is worth it enough to start putting them down. Seriously,
Sorry, male gamers of Reddit and 4Chan, but Angry Birds only came out five years ago. Unless you want to try to argue that women have just been playing Bejeweled for the last 13 years, the math just doesn’t add up.
This is an unnecessary attack on groups of people who are actually probably more concerned with playing video games than putting down women. But instead of continuing the article with the following paragraph, they instead decide to take a detour into the land of “FUCK YOU, HALF OUR AUDIENCE.”
I’d rather the piece left this out and simply celebrated the fact that women as a whole are a big demographic than take the time to make the article worse for the purposes of putting people down.
If the piece had left this part out, then the angry male gamers who read it would have continued to ignore the implications of the actual facts in the survey and continue to cry about how women are only gaining ground in gaming because zomg stupid facebook games no one currs etc.
but please continue to point out how hurt your feelings are that the article has drawn logical conclusions based on research. Please continue to make the inaccuracy of stereotypes about women in gaming all about you and how bad you feel.
So there’s this bad guy, he’s a psychopath, and he has this seriously dangerous assassin on speed dial. He’s threatening to kill my mum if I don’t give him that thing he wants. Sadly, the thing he wants is to take the blood of a virgin, because that will make him immortal. So he told me I’d have to hold that girl still while he tkes blood from her. No biggie. He told me a few days ago, and I agreed to it, because a good friend of mine told me since the girl isn’t really a virgin, he won’t become immortal, the opposite will happen: he’ll crumble to dust and not even realize.
Okay, so maybe the girl will have to suffer a bit. But, hey, it’s just a bit of blood, and I don’t like her anyway, she’s a bitch. But I’ll pretend to be her friend for a while, to get her to trust me.
What do you mean, I should consider other options? I’m forced to do this, I can’t be bothered to care about the bodily agency of some girl who always treated me like shit anyway. And if I told her she might not agree. You know, if I don’t ask her, she can’t say no, right?
Yeah, I know that my plan involves the use of her body against her will while she’s helpless and at my mercy. What? It’s not like I have time to come up with a different plan, right?
So she’s probably going to be terrified.
And feel powerless.
And me and some other guy are going to manhandle her while she begs for help, falsely believing she could trust me.
Hey, it’s not like we’re gonna rape her, we just need a bit of her blood.
Okay, so maybe it’s a bit unfortunate that he’s also that guy whose family killed hers, and that she’ll probably think that he’ll kill her once he has her blood, but… it’ll be quick. And I’m completely sure that my little trick will work. It’s all for the greater good.
Okay, I feel a bit sorry for her, but hey, I also know the perfect line to get back at her. Sorry. What, you thought we were friends? Too bad. You’re not mine.
What do you think about BDSM that doesn't include 'violence' as you term it- so petplay, and other things in this vein? Since actually, these concepts don't even need to contain rough sex to have them. Ie, my partner and I are into petplay, and I'm her little cowpet! We're working on inducing lactation because that's our kink, we like collars and leashes and the occasional rough sex. I love the sex, I love the afterglow, I love nuzzling her and mooing and giggling because her face lights up.
I was going to try to respond seriously to this, but I just can’t get over the fact that you actually wrote to a total stranger about your “lactation kink.”
People aren’t lying when they say that BDSMers have a serious oversharing problem, oh my god.
“The Never Call: There are some people who love to text so much that the phone part of their cell phone has become completely obsolete. They’re like Tobias Funke the never-nude from Arrested Development, except instead of refusing to take off the last bit of clothing for a completely irrational reason, they are scared of a wonderful and time-honored mode of communication.”—
I am one of those people. But let me explain something to you. The telephone was an aberation in human development. It was a 70 year or so period where for some reason humans decided it was socially acceptable to ring a loud bell in someone else’s life and they were expected to come running, like dogs. This was the equivalent of thinking it was okay to walk into someone’s living room and start shouting. it was never okay. It’s less okay now. Telephone calls are rude. They are interruptive. Technology has solved this brief aberration in human behavior. We have a thing now called THE TEXT MESSAGE. It is magical, non-intrusive, optional, and, just like human speech originally was meant to be, is turn based and two way. You talk. I talk next. Then you talk. And we do it when it’s convenient for both of us.
Not only do I find the telephone somewhat intrusive, but I find it a really awkward way of communicating with people! I don’t like talking on the phone. I really enjoy spending time with friends, I enjoy chatting online and communicating via email, but the telephone cranks my social awkwardness and inability to deal with prolonged social contact up to the max. I assume what’s going on is that it’s stripping away all the visual/non-verbal social cues, so I have to be a lot more socially “on” than usual, as well as taking away the possibility of built-in breaks to the conversation — when you’re participating in a shared activity (lunch, movies, strolling around and sightseeing, having coffee at home, whatever) you’re not communicating all the time, you’re doing other things as well.
And I agree 100% about the intrusiveness and “talk to me right now!” aspect of calling someone (which is why I don’t like making phone calls; I hate interrupting people). Like the commentary says … it’s not a natural way of communicating. (Which is not to say that “natural = good” and “unnatural = bad”. Arsenic is natural; literacy is not. But gracefully communicating via phone is something we have to specially train our brains to be able to do, with varying degrees of success.)
Not to say I hate phones across the board — well, okay, I do kinda hate phones, but they’re definitely useful for keeping in touch with people far away, and of course they’re great for people who like them! But given the choice, I’d rather stay in touch with my long-distance friends via text-based and online forms of communication, with phone conversations being an occasional thing and reserved for the people I’m most comfortable with. And I’m glad that we have so many more options now for staying in close contact with people, so the phone is optional and can be avoided if you need to.
At this point, the only phone calls I take are those that are scheduled in advance. I dream of the day when I have enough clout and freedom to change my voicemail to “You have reached Gianduja Kiss. Now hang up and send me an email.”
blindmouse: #interesting!#I do think talking on the phone can offer something to long-distance relationships (with family/friends/whoever) that text and skype can’t#you can spend hours wandering around the house talking to your mum while you cook dinner etc#and of course sometimes you do need to contact someone IMMEDIATELY and can’t wait to see if they got your text#because your sink is overflowing and on fire#but the notion of casual and professional communication by text-based medium being more considerate and useful is one that#appeals to me *immensely*#there’s still such a strong feeling that the professional grown up thing to do is to just pick up the damn phone#if we really do think that just because it’s what our parents did … then hell yes let’s tear that down