I'm not a fan of hers, and this guy basically summed up the reasons why I think she's full of shit. He, however, is as full of himself as she is full of herself. Still, between the 2 assholes, he's slightly less offensive to an overall audience.
\sorry just saw this, have to bring this up.
I respectfully disagree.
While I don't care much for Sarkeesian either (her ideas about helpless women being desirable sounds is SOO Fem101 it hurts), I can't say the "Amazing Aetheist" is much better (wait, is his 'in your face' YouTube name supposed to be a self-intellect indicator? Cuz it's no better than the sassy way he says "feminist frequency"
Sarkeesian is at least TRYING to change the way women are seen in videogames, whether right or wrong, she's trying to flip the ideas on its head; she's fulfilling what her ridiculous KickStarter set out to do. Some of her points are good (parts about Zelda definitely, or any instance where the trope is repeated, or a girl usually fails to help herself which ends up being a wasted effort because she's gotta wait for the hero to roll in), but AA's ideas are trying to KEEP the discussions where they are; keep men in their higher positions in games with really, really grounded and simple-minded commentary like:
-- "It's just proper storytelling structure to have a mission that the hero imparts on, reluctantly, and come back with something" (this says nothing about women, or in effect, makes them the endgame goal --- Sarkeesian would likely say "an endgame goal to be CONQUERED" but *I* personally won't go there; but I'd argue instead that it's a really simple argument that kinda misses the point and certainly simplifies the whole journey)
-- "Games are made by men, for men" which limits future demographic potential and certainly leaves out any openess for female interest who have a chance to switch over (like I said earlier with my SMT comment, there really is NO reason why a game with a silent protagonist with as much agency as picking some options to offer a female lead -- but the SMT creator cited "tradition" as a legitimate reason)
-- His final idea that "Women are damsels that we WANT to save, because we love them!" just reinforces that they can't help themselves, or certainly does ring that women seem "incapable" themselves. If a guy can be a one-man-army, why can't the woman make efforts to flee her captor AT ALL?
-- Anyone who wastes 4 minutes of a 10 minute video about how "shitty her ideas are" without actually indicating any
of the evidence that far in is a bigot. Period. In the first 2 minutes, all he's established is how he can write a full book about his contempt for her ideas and how he can't fit them all in a video (again, does nothing for discussion, but I'm sure it works for people who vehemently disagree with Sarkeesian)
Again, I really don't mind this trope when it's played out well, and I applauded games like Prince of Persia, Bioshock Infinite, and The Last of Us for making greater efforts to include the "saved lass" into the game mechanics... but too often it's played almost hilariously. And again, I'm not an advocate of Sarkeesian, but she does more for female-discourse than he does to legitimately and persuasively counter it.
Here's a funny video nowhttp://youtu.be/v8_7yPocGPg
Swedishness.... and yes, that is the real
Swedish Prime Minister being scolded