For those of you who don't know, Anita Sarkeesian, a long-time internet based feminist studies major has taken a second crack of the whip at analysing videogames. This in itself is nothing new - Studies on sexualisation, non-sexualisation and representation of the fairer sex in games has been done nearly to death in recent years (I fondly recall a fantastic piece on a larger woman in Borderlands 2, and also on Chun-Li talking about the "Respectable vs Metal Bikini warriors" in games). And neither is scamming on kickstarter.
When Sarkeesian started this online venture on youtube, she first went to raise funds on Kickstarter. $6000, to be exact. Now, the production values you would think, should be great for a £4000 (ish) venture on the internet.
Well, erm... She's stood against a greenscreen. I'd love to know where that money all -went-, since greenscreening, while time intensive is certainly not expensive. Titles are impressive, granted but not FOUR GRAND impressive.
As far as the content goes - It's... a little stretched. Some good points are raised, regarding (in this first episode) the "Damsel in Distress" trope associated with games (particularly with Nintendo games). Regarding this, she starts with "StarFox Adventures", a Gamecube title that originally started out as another title called "Dinosaur planet" starring a female character. The developer, RARE left Nintendo however and the project, turned over to Ninty who turned it into the Starfox game we got. Sarkeesian's issue with this, is that the female character was replaced with the male Fox McCloud, and she becomes the damsel.
Okay, so I'll start with what actually happened, and not "Nintendo are sexist for not having female leads":
1 - The lead character of the Rare title likely had copyright on the design. With them gone, Nintendo likely did NOT have the rights and would need a new character. It happens - See Capcoms issues with getting Karin to return to the Street Fighter series
2 - The character from the N64 beta does indeed share a name with the damsel character from the final Gamecube game. Now, granted, she is a distressed damsel but she is playable, and does kick arse. She's not helpless - out of her depth, which had happened to McCloud several times. Case in point - The amount of times Falco saved his behind in the first two games.
.jpg)
Moving away and on, and focusing on Princess Peach. Now, she is a damsel. Through and through, it's no secret she's designed on the princesses from fairy tales. However, she did haver her own game (Which Sarkeesian happily forgets) in which the tables are turned, and Peach has to save Mario. That there, is a great subject for feminist debate. Sadly, the only real debate here is how much of the four thousand pounds Sarkeesian has actually used on this series (In which she happily declares Ninteno to be objectifying Peach by not making her playable, despite having her own titles and being playable in nearly every spin off title).
A lot of her arguments too, are based around arcade and console games of the late 80's and early 90's. She calls this use of the trope lazy.
Now, lazy it may have been but logically, the technology back then simply did not exist for the storylines we have today. Yes, it was overused but it worked - You can blame the success of Super Mario Bros and the clones that popped up like weeds for the continuation.
Next up, the Legend of Zelda gets hit with this stick. She does give Princess Zelda (the girl, guys) some props though, for not being just a damsel but also for having a will, and fight of her own. However, she takes on a new term, the "Helpful damsel".
This is where my agreement ends. She notes two titles, Wind Waker and Ocarina of Time in which Zelda spends most of the time in disguise until the last moment when she is revealed, then kidnapped or told to wait.
Right then. Let's forget Sheik (Who Zelda plays as in OoT) then, while hinted female, fends for herself with ease and remains hidden for seven years during the game. Let's forget Tetra now, who after being complimented by Sarkeesian is attacked in seconds for being royalty. Interesting, given that Zelda has a much more dominant role in these games. Far from the damsel, she is shown to not only be a stern monarch, but also adept and taking care of herself and resisting capture - ultimately, she is the videogame version of Queen Elizabeth the first, with the heart and stomach of a man. What Sarkeesian is sheerly basing her thesis on is the physical appearance of the character, which ultimately defeats her own point.
She next makes note of the re-releases of these games on downloadable platforms like Xbox Live Arcade, Playstation Network, Steam and so on - She claims this (in a very roundabout way) that this is potentially harmful to a new generation.
What this trend actually is - This generation of games has seen a massive resurgence of older players returning to the hobby. So it makes sense to re-release, no?
The last game that gets the slap is Double Dragon, which she claims (during the infamous intro in which the lead characters girlfriend is womped in the stomach, before being abducted) shows, allegedly, womens underwear. Fact is, it's subjective. There's a huge debate online whether this is actually shown (yes, people are fighting over a black line of pixels), so commenting on it as fact is nothing but damaging to her credibility (if siphoning cash wasn't already)
Finally on her closing statement, she urges that developers push for less "sexist" games using this trope. Again, I made the point before over technology, but she misses out on a key franchise that actually shares a birthday with The Legend of Zelda that stars a female character. And not just any, but one of the strongest women in any form of media to date - I of course talk of Metroid, and Samus Aran who has NEVER been a damsel, is the driving force in her own series and, over her 27 year career has proven herself with ease (even gaining a doppelgänger in Wreck It Ralph in the form of Calhoun) and continues to do so this day across platformers, first person shooters and fighting games.
I'm no stranger to analysis. Frankly, I thrive off it but to deliberately ignore all possibilities and to scam people for $6000 on kickstarter? Credibility is gone. I will continue to watch the series, but don't think you'll be able to take any debate to Sarkseesian think again - Comments, ratings and messages to her are disabled (further taking away validity - If you analyse, you have to defend. This is a simple fact and kinda just common courtesy) so, sadly she'll lead on this way blindly without evening listening to what anyone else has to say.
As is the internet. Either way. I do suggest you watch the first episode of the series for yourself and make your own conclusions. Lord knows how a debate on this would be nice
All the Best.
