00shad00
00shad00
00shad00

Not "uppity", I'm just puzzled by what you said. You keep repeating the word "logic" with such certainty, but I'm not sure I see it. It might be easier for me to understand what assumptions you are and aren't making, if you could put your reasoning in the form of-

As I already said, the only reason I was even replying to you was because you claimed logical flaws with the video, while the only logical flaws I could see are those of your own. I wasn't really interested in your opinion about the video, everyone's got an opinion, and you're entitled to yours. However, I'm

Ah, my bad, I thought you meant the *other* line you had quoted. So... the definition of the trope is not where the 'logic' leap happens? But it occurs when she provides one alternative to the trope, as opposed to providing none or 2 or 3 alternatives, and that alternative happens to be a female protagonist (who isn't

A literary device that "disempowers female characters and robs them of the chance to be heroes in their own rite(sic)" is the definition of "damsel in distress"? If that's what you think, okay; but that's not what Sarkeesian meant. She was talking about the *effects* of such a trope, by drawing on the example of

Another difference between Tomb Raider and Uncharted: Uncharted has romance, Tomb Raider doesn't (yet). I hope they'll add a romance arc for Lara Croft as Uncharted did for Nathan Drake. If Drake can be open about his sexuality is Uncharted, so can Lara Croft in Tomb Raider.

Huh? The definition of damsel-in-distress is the French "demoiselle en détresse", which is basically "the helpless female character who relies on others to save her from her predicament." A damsel in distress trope is a damsel in distress trope every time. The video's pointing out the trope has been used a lot. The

I know you're just relaying the line of reasoning from the 'outside world', but I'm just confused as to which world this 'outside world' is, because in my world she's not the face/voice of her/my cause. If this 'outside world' is the world in which everyone else just accepts the status quo and Sarkeesian is the only

What exactly do you think her video is reviewing? She's not reviewing and presenting an entire game, she's not telling the audience what she thinks of the game *itself*. She's reviewing a trope.

You're still using 'logic leaps' to refer to things that are perfectly logical. How the damsel in distress trope can be justified when it's used on Tetra in Wind Waker is *irrelevant* to her argument, not going into more details about what had happened in that story that could potentially justify the use of the trope

How is her being visible even a legitimate reason to object to her? I thought the reason given in an earlier post was her being the 'representative' of female gamers everywhere, which is of course false.

My point is you're the one who's making leaps in logic, not her. Those examples in the video are not 'analytical errors', they serve the exact function of the video which is to point out the prevalence and pervasiveness of the trope. You just went on a tangent and talked about how she'd failed to mention all those

I thought the tendency for association was a pretty common one? Especially if you're in the minority, like you said, it would be nice to see characters who share similar things with ourselves. And because it's 'nice' to have those, I look for them, so I can have something 'nice'. It's not like I'd be upset if none of

You're misrepresenting her 'argument' as her saying 'the solution to the problem is ______', and since _______ isn't a good enough solution in your mind, her 'solution' is problematic. The reason that's a straw man is because her original 'argument' was never what you purport it to be in the first place. Throughout

Well, I care if a game has any LGBT characters, and I care enough to actively look for games with LGBT characters in them. Just like I do with films. Of course we all want to be able to play the game and have fun, but you don't have to stop there. [I'm only posting this because your post started with "I'm gay", and I

Yes, she did suggest those damsels in distress could play a more active role, in kind of a "wouldn't it be nice if _____" way. But that's not the same as her suggesting a solution to the problem, let alone the sole solution to the problem. You're attacking a straw man. There's no conflict between what she said in the

I'm not sure if she's only making these videos for those who are already being critical of this medium. The target audience seems to be anyone with a minimum high school/undergraduate level comprehension who has the capacity for critical thinking. They might not even be aware of these issues, or agree with her. These

I guess I wasn't explicit enough: how did you leap from her stating all of those things in the video, to, the video presuming "the problem is solved by _______"?

If you're going to talk about somebody else's leaps in logic, you might also wanna be more mindful of your own? Where did you get the impression of the presumption that the only way the problem can be solved is "by nominally not having female characters be deprived of agency in any way..."?

Indeed, this piece is marvelous. Talk about a game that can engage the player emotionally. Wow. Especially if the player is a compassionate person before going into this game, the game will enhance what they've already got. Not sure if this is just preaching to the choir, though. I'm not sure what effects it'll have

Back in the days of the NES, people already had the Game Genie. You didn't have to learn to be good at... playing video games. -_-; I've never learned to be good at playing video games, and I have absolutely no interest in that, but I can still enjoy playing video games. Games really should be more accessible, so more