Many times when the issue of harassment comes up, an exasperated convention staffer exclaims "GUYS, if someone gives you trouble just TELL A STAFF MEMBER!" That say it as though we wouldn't have this problem if we just told staffers about it when it happened, it would be a non-issue. Just tell the staff . . . problem solved?
Nope.
In a perfect world, if someone was harassed, they would report the incident. They'd feel comfortable and confident calmly telling someone what happened, and the staff would hunt the jerkwad down and subject them to effective disciplinary action, probably taking away their badge. This would teach the harasser a valuable lesson and they'd never do it again, and even take the time to educate their peers so others don't do it either.
But that doesn't happen.
I'll get to that later though. The fact is, even if reporting an incident had a happy ending, by the time someone needs to report harassment, it's too late. Something bad has already happened, the damage has been done. Even if justice is served, it won't undo anything, nor will it prevent others from doing it. Those concerned about the problem want to see a geek culure where harassment is very rare, and we know it's not a scattered series of unrelated events, but that harassment is a trend, and a result of problematic attitudes toward women at conventions.
Part of the problem is that douchebags think anything goes at conventions, and thus it's okay to be their true douchebag selves. To be sure, a lot of harassers are cock waffles. But let's look at the other reason why this keeps happening. In geek media - anime, comic books, video games, science fiction, etc. - women are objectified. That's not news. They're usually drawn to be attractive to the male protagonist and presumably male audience. They're often sexual and romantic partners for the male protagonist. They're there for the protagonists, and rather than subjects who act, they are objects who are acted upon. When one consumes a lot of this media, media made - again - for male audiences, they often internalize two messages: 1) that this stuff isn't for girls, and 2) girls in nerdy spaces exist for the men in those spaces, specifically as potential sexual or romantic partners. I mean, it's not like those girls could possibly be "real" fans, right?*
When it comes to cosplay, these messages usually translate to problematic discussions. If these characters are drawn to turn men on, one may then assume that women dressing as these characters for the same reason: to be sexy. We often use the term "self-objectification," which implies that they're turning themselves into objects, thus it's okay to treat them like objects. Or that they wouldn't dress like that if they didn't want sexual attention.*
This is why we have the CONsent project, or the "Cosplay =/= Consent" campaign, to try to drill home the idea that just because someone's wearing a costume doesn't mean you can treat them like an object. It's a great idea, but I'm not sure it does anything. I have yet to hear from someone who's been "turned around" by seeing the campaign. In fact, I've even met a so-called supporter of the CONsent project who saw nothing wrong with harassment. He felt that it came with the territory and wasn't such a bad thing, and that we should only focus on physical assaults at conventions.
In any case, because the issue is so widespread and caused by attitudes that run deep in our subculture, reporting the issue and punishing the harassers is a band-aid solution to the problem.
And we're not confident it'll do anything.
I'll preface this by saying I've never reported harassment at a convention. I'm lucky that I've never had to. But if I was in the situation, I wouldn't want to. Staffers have so much to deal with, and on top of that now they gotta go hunt down this guy? It's a big convention with so many people, what are the chances of finding him? Do they have the time and energy for it? Is it worth it? What would they do if they caught him? They have zero evidence that anything actually happened, it's my word against his, can you really confiscate a $50 badge without evidence? No, that's not logical. Whether he denies it, defends his actions ("I just did X, come on are you really gonna ban me for that?") or show enough remorse that the average staffer would probably let him off with a warning. Either way, I don't see any real action taken unless someone actually sees someone doing something really bad.
If he is kicked out, the only thing he'll learn is that the convention is run by a bunch of tyrants. He'll probably just go to other conventions and do the same thing.
Convention staff, if you feel that you can handle a report of harassment well and effectively handle the situation, hats off to you! If staffers can actually do something, that's great. But no matter how good you guys are at handling situations that occur, you need to understand that your actions alone are not going to remedy the problem. The only way to stop convention harassment is a radical change in cultural attitudes.
*I'm not saying that ALL geeks feel this way, or that all men feel this way, just that it's a common way of thinking and is usually a result of so much exposure to media that caters to the male gaze.
Saturday, June 29, 2013
Friday, June 7, 2013
My Reaction To "The Greak Geek Sexism Debate" (Part 2)
Okay, now that I've had something to eat, it's time for Part 2! In the second incident in The Great Geek Sexism Debate roundup, we have a feminist skeptic that was harassed for her feminist beliefs at The Amazing Meeting, a big skeptic conference. She was then harassed online after the conference, and her address was posted online.
All becase she dared to be a feminist in a space that largely regarded feminism as irrelevant at best and bullshit at worst.
I choose "bullshit" because one of the most famous atheists, at least in mainstream culture, is Penn Jillette of Penn & Teller. He also says "feminist" the way Draco Malfoy says "mudblood." He's not a fan. I don't actually know if they did an episode of Bullshit about feminism, and quite honestly I'd rather not know if they did. No really, please don't tell me. Athesists and skeptics have notoriously bad attitudes toward feminism. What's sad is that a lot of these atheist public figures, mostly men, have great things to say about other topics. I'll watch their videos and agree enthusiastically with almost everything they say. Then they bring up feminism and there's an old-school, cliche record scratch in my head. This often turns me off from these figures completely, or almost completely, but that's because I am a feminist. The non-feminist viewers will follow these anti-feminist viewpoints as "religiously" as they follow everything else these men have to say. They'll insist that they think women should be equal, but come on, this guy makes some good points . . .
Not what you'd expect, huh? Especially when you think of how many women must stray from religion and become atheists and skeptics to escape sexism.
That's why feminism is so relevant to the skeptic community. Just like it's relevant to the nerd community. It's not directly relevant to the subject matter, but it's necessary because the community breeds anti-feminism and misogyny, making the community hostile toward women in general, especially women who vocally challenge the status quo. Like the woman who complained about the man who propositioned her in an elevator at 4am at an atheist conference, only to have Richard Dawkins sarcastically compare her frivolous problem to women in Africa having their genitals mutilated. Because if women are experiencing really bad oppression, we're never allowed to talk about our own problems regarding harassment and microaggressions.
I'm not saying that a conference focusing on pseudoscience should have programming with regards to women in the community, at least not on par with their relevant programming. But aside from a better approach to convention harassment, the community in general should have a place for people to talk about this issue. Maybe host an after-hours roundtable discussion, or host a separate conference for the issue. Either way, since this issue is plaguing the skeptic community, feminism is absolutely relevant.
All becase she dared to be a feminist in a space that largely regarded feminism as irrelevant at best and bullshit at worst.
I choose "bullshit" because one of the most famous atheists, at least in mainstream culture, is Penn Jillette of Penn & Teller. He also says "feminist" the way Draco Malfoy says "mudblood." He's not a fan. I don't actually know if they did an episode of Bullshit about feminism, and quite honestly I'd rather not know if they did. No really, please don't tell me. Athesists and skeptics have notoriously bad attitudes toward feminism. What's sad is that a lot of these atheist public figures, mostly men, have great things to say about other topics. I'll watch their videos and agree enthusiastically with almost everything they say. Then they bring up feminism and there's an old-school, cliche record scratch in my head. This often turns me off from these figures completely, or almost completely, but that's because I am a feminist. The non-feminist viewers will follow these anti-feminist viewpoints as "religiously" as they follow everything else these men have to say. They'll insist that they think women should be equal, but come on, this guy makes some good points . . .
Not what you'd expect, huh? Especially when you think of how many women must stray from religion and become atheists and skeptics to escape sexism.
That's why feminism is so relevant to the skeptic community. Just like it's relevant to the nerd community. It's not directly relevant to the subject matter, but it's necessary because the community breeds anti-feminism and misogyny, making the community hostile toward women in general, especially women who vocally challenge the status quo. Like the woman who complained about the man who propositioned her in an elevator at 4am at an atheist conference, only to have Richard Dawkins sarcastically compare her frivolous problem to women in Africa having their genitals mutilated. Because if women are experiencing really bad oppression, we're never allowed to talk about our own problems regarding harassment and microaggressions.
I'm not saying that a conference focusing on pseudoscience should have programming with regards to women in the community, at least not on par with their relevant programming. But aside from a better approach to convention harassment, the community in general should have a place for people to talk about this issue. Maybe host an after-hours roundtable discussion, or host a separate conference for the issue. Either way, since this issue is plaguing the skeptic community, feminism is absolutely relevant.
My Reaction To "The Greak Geek Sexism Debate" (Part 1)
I'm sorta kicking myself for not seeing this article when it first came out, or maybe I did but didn't read it because I was at work. Not sure, either way, I just read it today. It's a roundup of three women's experiences at conventions, all nerd-related. It summarizes the incidents and aftermath pretty wekk, I think the piece speaks for itself, but I do have some commentary to add.
You can find the original article here.
This ended up being a little long so I'll write this in three parts, each entry dealing with a different incident in the article.
The first incident deals with a woman at Readercon, a literary convention in Burlington, MA. A convention volunteer followed her around, making sexual comments, and her attempts to walk away and shake him passively didn't work. At an evening event, things got physical as he pressed against her in front of a lot of people, and she loudly told him to cut it out. Even then, he continued to follow her around for the rest of the convention. She filed a complaint, but despite the convention's zero-tolerance policy, the volunteer wasn't banned because he was "sincerely regretful." At least not at first. Eventually the whole board of directors resigned and the volunteer was permanently banned.
I see the problem here. See, volunteers are extremely valuable to conventions. Most of the conventions are run by nonprofit organizations that can't pay for a huge staff of people, so running these cons is a labor of love for all involved, and I have a lot of respect for volunteers. They sacrifice their time, energy, and sanity to make sure things run as smoothly as possible, and dealing with their fair share of entitled douchecanoes in the process. So when someone willing to do this breaks the rules of the convention, not only do people find it hard to believe that one of their own could do something so distasteful, but the decision-makers are reluctant to let go of someone who - in their eyes - is an otherwise valuable asset to the convention. It's not like they have people lining up to take his place. No convention has a surplus of volunteers.
I don't mean to justify his behavior, of course! He still did a bad thing and should have gotten the banhammer right away. Fact is, as a volunteer he is representing the convention and needs to act as such. How can someone feel safe at a convention and trust the staff to act on incidents of harassment when even the volunteers are guilty of it?
Also, the entire board resigning was a little hasty. Yes, they made a bad decision, but I'd rather see them release an apology and then proactively work toward preventing this in the future, learning from their mistake. The problem with a changing of the guard with regard to conventions is that it never really works. They have experience planning the convention, and they've built a relationship with veteran attendees, and completely replacing the entire board may have negaive consequences for the overall convention.
You can find the original article here.
This ended up being a little long so I'll write this in three parts, each entry dealing with a different incident in the article.
The first incident deals with a woman at Readercon, a literary convention in Burlington, MA. A convention volunteer followed her around, making sexual comments, and her attempts to walk away and shake him passively didn't work. At an evening event, things got physical as he pressed against her in front of a lot of people, and she loudly told him to cut it out. Even then, he continued to follow her around for the rest of the convention. She filed a complaint, but despite the convention's zero-tolerance policy, the volunteer wasn't banned because he was "sincerely regretful." At least not at first. Eventually the whole board of directors resigned and the volunteer was permanently banned.
I see the problem here. See, volunteers are extremely valuable to conventions. Most of the conventions are run by nonprofit organizations that can't pay for a huge staff of people, so running these cons is a labor of love for all involved, and I have a lot of respect for volunteers. They sacrifice their time, energy, and sanity to make sure things run as smoothly as possible, and dealing with their fair share of entitled douchecanoes in the process. So when someone willing to do this breaks the rules of the convention, not only do people find it hard to believe that one of their own could do something so distasteful, but the decision-makers are reluctant to let go of someone who - in their eyes - is an otherwise valuable asset to the convention. It's not like they have people lining up to take his place. No convention has a surplus of volunteers.
I don't mean to justify his behavior, of course! He still did a bad thing and should have gotten the banhammer right away. Fact is, as a volunteer he is representing the convention and needs to act as such. How can someone feel safe at a convention and trust the staff to act on incidents of harassment when even the volunteers are guilty of it?
Also, the entire board resigning was a little hasty. Yes, they made a bad decision, but I'd rather see them release an apology and then proactively work toward preventing this in the future, learning from their mistake. The problem with a changing of the guard with regard to conventions is that it never really works. They have experience planning the convention, and they've built a relationship with veteran attendees, and completely replacing the entire board may have negaive consequences for the overall convention.
Thursday, June 6, 2013
So, where IS our Wonder Woman movie?
I began writing this when I was somewhat agitated, and it turned into more than just an angry rant, but I will warn that some writing may not be the most perfect, tactful, intelligent feminist writing on the internet. In fact there may be some snark in this piece. I am not apoloizing for how I feel about this issue, but you have been warned.
So I heard the new Superman movie was good. I'm actually pretty happy about that, but it got me thinking. We have a SuperMAN movie, and a SuperMAN TV show. We have a huge BatMAN franchise, and the Avengers movie (featuring a total of one female superhero) was great, and tangentially related are the movies about the men of the Avengers. We're even seeing sequels to Iron MAN, Captain America, and Thor. Great movies of course, but it would be nice if Natasha had her own movie rather than just appear in movies that center around the men of the Avengers.
But we really haven't seen any movies about female superheroes since the early 2000's, and we haven't really seen any good movies about female superheroes since . . . ever. We've heard murmurings about Joss Whedon directing a Wonder Woman movie, but then Marvel scooped him up and they're never letting him go, so there goes that dream. Yes, she had a brief TV show in the 70's, but that's about it. The attempt at a more modern show on the CW recently failed.
So we're clear, I get that she appears in some animated TV shows that almost no normal person over the age of 10 watches. I know she's going to be in the Justice League movie that may or may not happen - that should be a given, she's one of the most iconic comic book characters in history.
But all that is not enough. You can bring it up to make me feel better all you want, you can condescend to me and tell me again and again that she appears here or there or she'll be in this or that movie about someone else or that centers around a male dominated group of superheroes, but it's not enough. We need a Wonder Woman movie aleady!
Why her? Well, a movie about any female superhero would be great. A Zatanna movie would be awesome, and a Black Widow movie would be a great addition to the Avengers franchise, but Wonder Woman is, as I've said, one of the most iconic superheroes we have, and probably the most popular female superhero out there. Go to the comic book section of Barnes and Noble - yeah yeah I know, I'm not gonna make you buy anything, but I do want you to get a sense of what's popular. Look for the books about female superheroes. Ignore the Avengers and Justice League books, they have women in them but that's not the same as being about women. You probably see Wonder Woman books, one or two Batgirl books and . . . well if you can find books about any other woman you're lucky, because like I mentioned months ago, I could only find books about those two ladies. I loved both of them, but I that's not the point, I wanted more options. More choices. More variety. But even that's not the point here, I'm trying to illustrate that if there's one woman that's even remotely comparable to Superman or Batman in terms of popularity, it's Wonder Woman.
And it's time. She's been around since WWII, the fact that there are zero movies about her, let alone good movies, is not okay.
Don't tell me it won't sell tickets. The myth that movies about women won't have a wide appeal has been debunked thanks in large part to The Hunger Games, Bridesmaids, Brave, and if you wanna get nerdy, ALL the Hayo Miyazaki films. They do still need to be good, of course. Do we hold movies about female superheroes, or women in general, to a higher standard? Yes, absolutely. People are quick to bring up the fact that pretty much all movies about female superheroes have sucked. And that's true. But there have been just as many movies about male superheroes that have sucked, but we can ignore them, and not use them to dismiss all male superhero movies, because there have been so many good ones as well. The Batman movies, at least Michael Uslan's movies, are pretty much all great, especially the last trilogy (last as in the last made, not final). The Iron Man movies have been wonderful (or at least the first and third). Thor was good and Captain America is one of my favorites. So we can easily forget about awful Green Lantern Green Hornet movies, or the mediocre Spider Man trilogy.
We wouldn't feel the need to hold female characters, and movies about women, to a higher standard if we had more of them. But since there are so few out there, we expect the ones that do exist to work extra hard.
These movies being good goes beyond the mere fact that they're about men, but the fact that they're about men did play a part in their success. People believed these movies would do well, so the best of the best were willing to work on it, and the powers that be were willing to pay for the talent to make these movies successful. They were also willing to invest in quality special effects and the time to make the movie awesome. I don't think the same time, money, or effort has gone into any movie about a female superhero, and that's one of the reasons why those movies had so much tits and ass - sex sells, but it's a cheap sell. It's what producers rely on when they want lots of men to see and appreciate their movie without really trying to make the movie actually good.
So I will acknowledge that a Wonder Woman movie would need to be spectacular, and a disappointment may be better than no movie at all. But enough people have taken the risk with Superman, Batman, Spider Man, and almost all of the male Avengers, and while in hindsight not all of those movies were amazing, someone took the risk and they all had a great turnout at the box office. I have complete faith that we would see the same success with a Wonder Woman movie, we just need someone to take the plunge.
And again, I'd rather people not take it upon themselves to tell me where Wonder Woman does show up on TV and/or film. I know people do it to make me feel better, but don't. I don't think it's greedy to want a movie about her specifically when we have so many movies about her many male counterparts.
So I heard the new Superman movie was good. I'm actually pretty happy about that, but it got me thinking. We have a SuperMAN movie, and a SuperMAN TV show. We have a huge BatMAN franchise, and the Avengers movie (featuring a total of one female superhero) was great, and tangentially related are the movies about the men of the Avengers. We're even seeing sequels to Iron MAN, Captain America, and Thor. Great movies of course, but it would be nice if Natasha had her own movie rather than just appear in movies that center around the men of the Avengers.
But we really haven't seen any movies about female superheroes since the early 2000's, and we haven't really seen any good movies about female superheroes since . . . ever. We've heard murmurings about Joss Whedon directing a Wonder Woman movie, but then Marvel scooped him up and they're never letting him go, so there goes that dream. Yes, she had a brief TV show in the 70's, but that's about it. The attempt at a more modern show on the CW recently failed.
So we're clear, I get that she appears in some animated TV shows that almost no normal person over the age of 10 watches. I know she's going to be in the Justice League movie that may or may not happen - that should be a given, she's one of the most iconic comic book characters in history.
But all that is not enough. You can bring it up to make me feel better all you want, you can condescend to me and tell me again and again that she appears here or there or she'll be in this or that movie about someone else or that centers around a male dominated group of superheroes, but it's not enough. We need a Wonder Woman movie aleady!
Why her? Well, a movie about any female superhero would be great. A Zatanna movie would be awesome, and a Black Widow movie would be a great addition to the Avengers franchise, but Wonder Woman is, as I've said, one of the most iconic superheroes we have, and probably the most popular female superhero out there. Go to the comic book section of Barnes and Noble - yeah yeah I know, I'm not gonna make you buy anything, but I do want you to get a sense of what's popular. Look for the books about female superheroes. Ignore the Avengers and Justice League books, they have women in them but that's not the same as being about women. You probably see Wonder Woman books, one or two Batgirl books and . . . well if you can find books about any other woman you're lucky, because like I mentioned months ago, I could only find books about those two ladies. I loved both of them, but I that's not the point, I wanted more options. More choices. More variety. But even that's not the point here, I'm trying to illustrate that if there's one woman that's even remotely comparable to Superman or Batman in terms of popularity, it's Wonder Woman.
And it's time. She's been around since WWII, the fact that there are zero movies about her, let alone good movies, is not okay.
Don't tell me it won't sell tickets. The myth that movies about women won't have a wide appeal has been debunked thanks in large part to The Hunger Games, Bridesmaids, Brave, and if you wanna get nerdy, ALL the Hayo Miyazaki films. They do still need to be good, of course. Do we hold movies about female superheroes, or women in general, to a higher standard? Yes, absolutely. People are quick to bring up the fact that pretty much all movies about female superheroes have sucked. And that's true. But there have been just as many movies about male superheroes that have sucked, but we can ignore them, and not use them to dismiss all male superhero movies, because there have been so many good ones as well. The Batman movies, at least Michael Uslan's movies, are pretty much all great, especially the last trilogy (last as in the last made, not final). The Iron Man movies have been wonderful (or at least the first and third). Thor was good and Captain America is one of my favorites. So we can easily forget about awful Green Lantern Green Hornet movies, or the mediocre Spider Man trilogy.
We wouldn't feel the need to hold female characters, and movies about women, to a higher standard if we had more of them. But since there are so few out there, we expect the ones that do exist to work extra hard.
These movies being good goes beyond the mere fact that they're about men, but the fact that they're about men did play a part in their success. People believed these movies would do well, so the best of the best were willing to work on it, and the powers that be were willing to pay for the talent to make these movies successful. They were also willing to invest in quality special effects and the time to make the movie awesome. I don't think the same time, money, or effort has gone into any movie about a female superhero, and that's one of the reasons why those movies had so much tits and ass - sex sells, but it's a cheap sell. It's what producers rely on when they want lots of men to see and appreciate their movie without really trying to make the movie actually good.
So I will acknowledge that a Wonder Woman movie would need to be spectacular, and a disappointment may be better than no movie at all. But enough people have taken the risk with Superman, Batman, Spider Man, and almost all of the male Avengers, and while in hindsight not all of those movies were amazing, someone took the risk and they all had a great turnout at the box office. I have complete faith that we would see the same success with a Wonder Woman movie, we just need someone to take the plunge.
And again, I'd rather people not take it upon themselves to tell me where Wonder Woman does show up on TV and/or film. I know people do it to make me feel better, but don't. I don't think it's greedy to want a movie about her specifically when we have so many movies about her many male counterparts.
Thursday, May 30, 2013
Thoughts on Bioshock Infinite (spoilers toward the end)
PLEASE READ THE WHOLE THING BEFORE COMMENTING, because whatever knee-jerk reaction you may have, I probably address it somewhere in this post.
I finally finished the game! Great game, seriously weird ending, but in doing a little research on various theories and explanations I have a somewhat better grasp on things, and the game in general makes a whole lot of sense. On the whole, very different from the first game, but very good. Not sure if I'll play it as often as I've played the first game (a lot), but I'd say it's got some replay value. All in all, worthwhile.
(And worth the wait - as my friends know, I didn't buy it when it first came out, my birthday was May 18th so I decided to wait until then and got it as a birthday present)
Anyway, I don't so much have a theoretical analysis as a bunch of scattered thoughts. Let's begin.
As I expressed months before the game was released I was very hesitant about it, since Elizabeth looked like a damsel in distress on the cover art cirulating the internet shown above. I also saw some gifs that basically showed her getting taken, or begging the protagonist . Er, not cool guys. Then Ken Levine, the creator, admitted he wasn't interested in marketing the game to women, and that the target demographic for the advertising was the typical frat guy. Great. I mean, it made sense, gamer nerds were gonna buy it regardless of how it was marketed and they wanted to draw in some new fans, but stillm just frat guys? Not sorority girls? Or any type of "normal" woman?
Then the trailer came out. By this time I was sold(ish), but again, it showed Elizabeth about to be hanged, and the protagonist rescuing her. While she did nothing. Awesome.
Anyway, seeing Elizabeth largely shown as a helpless woman to be rescued and protected rubbed me the wrong way, despite my friends telling me she was gonna be awesome and useful. Then the game came out and surprise, she was a strong, independent woman and not at all a damsel! Yay!
When I started playing, she immediately struck me as strong willed. There was nothing weak about her. She seemed like the love child of Disney princesses Rapunzel and Belle - in voice, appearance, and character traits. That's not a terrible thing when you realize how strong both those women were.
And since the game only allows you to carry two weapons at a time, and doesn't let you carry any health kits or phials of salts (Infinite's version of Eve hypos), I certainly appreciated her throwing those things at me during combat. But it would have been even cooler if she participated in the fighting as well. That system would have been much better than one that makes the player rely on her for everything. Men in the 50's relied on women for a lot of things, didn't make those women their equals.
She does revive you when you "die," rather than have the game send you to a Vita Chamber, but women have been healers in games, especially RPGs, for decades. Healer may be a step above "damsel," but it's still not exactly progressive.
It is true that the game isn't one huge escort mission, which is a step up from the last Bioshock games. God I hated escorting that little girl toward the end. Seriously, that sucked, and I'm awful at escort missions. It's good that she (mysteriously) never gets hurt, ever, and doesn't need to be protected.
That said, Elizabeth isn't entirely without flaw from a feminist standpoint. As a character, she's strong, capable, and ambitious. But despite people arguing that Infinite is her story, not Booker's, I can't help be seeing that more often than not, she's an object to be acted upon. She's put in a tower to protect her, and seemingly to protect others from her. She's rescued from that tower. She's taken again and things are done to her. This whole story is about what's done to her. As Anita Sarkeesian said in her first video about damsels in distress (no I haven't seen the second as it was taken down before I could see it, but I'm keeping my eyes open), "it's been said that in the game of patriarchy, women aren't the opposing team, they're the ball." Elizabeth does get tossed back and forth, and from man to man, for various reasons. This doesn't reduce her to a weak, helpless character, but rather strips an otherwise capable woman of her own agency.
Elizabeth is not an annoying, useless, weak dolt that exists solely as an objective, but she does fit the basic definition of "damsel in distress," in that she is captured and needs to await rescue. The fact that she does act with some agency during combat, and the fact that she can pick locks for the player/protagonist does help detract from her objecitification, but I don't think it balances it out completely.
Elizabeth, in some ways - mostly in terms of her characterization - does show us how far women in video games have come. In other ways, she's a lot like women in ealier video games. She's strong, but still needs to be rescued. She's not on the sidelines, but she's not exactly in the middle of the action either. She's a supporting character, not the protagonist. She's a step up from the Little Sisters in the ealier games, but she's not exactly at the top of the staircase. She's great, I'd definitely cosplay as her, but we still have a long way to go.
On a slightly unrelated note, I would like to praise this series featuring female scientists in at least two of their games. You had Dr. Tennenbaum in the first game, and Lutece in this one. For games that took place so long ago, having women of science play prominent roles in the backstory is pretty awesome.
But enough of these white women. It's intersectionality time! It's also spoiler time. I tried to avoid them, but alas, I can't talk about Daisy Fitzroy without giving something away.
I noticed that racism is a prominent theme in the game; we, the modern gamers, are supposed to know that that's wrong. It's there to illustrate that Columbia, while beautiful, has an evil and creepy side. Much like I'm sure Rapture did before it went down the tubes (no pun intended). It's supposed to Columbia, not us, who think that Daisy Fitzroy (still one of the few prominent women of color in mainstream gaming) is evil. We're even supposed to support the radica uprising, although we're only aiding it to get the airship back.
Then why does Daisy become the enemy? Elizabeth has to kill her to keep from killing a child, and the final battle involves fighting off the Vox and destorying their zeppelins in order to protect your ship. If Levine wasn't such a fan of racists, why did he write a black radical to be so violent that she's a vile, child-murdering antagonist who needs to be killed? If the game was really anti-racist, why does the Voxpopuli turn against Booker and Elizabeth so quickly, despite Booker supposedly being a martyr? Well, I remember the stated reasons, I'm more questioning the writing choices than the characers' choices.
This may only be slightly problematic if video games in general had plenty of racial equality, people of color were usually present without being enemies, and nerd culture wasn't chock full of white privilege. Sadly, this isn't the case, and the racism in this game's storyline is at best more of the same, following a not-so-great trend in modern video games.
As a feminist, it's great to see women in general placed in prominent roles in video games, even if they're not protagonists. From an intersectionality perspective, however, it's disheartening to see a woman of color in such a negative portrayal of black radicals.
I finally finished the game! Great game, seriously weird ending, but in doing a little research on various theories and explanations I have a somewhat better grasp on things, and the game in general makes a whole lot of sense. On the whole, very different from the first game, but very good. Not sure if I'll play it as often as I've played the first game (a lot), but I'd say it's got some replay value. All in all, worthwhile.
(And worth the wait - as my friends know, I didn't buy it when it first came out, my birthday was May 18th so I decided to wait until then and got it as a birthday present)
Anyway, I don't so much have a theoretical analysis as a bunch of scattered thoughts. Let's begin.
As I expressed months before the game was released I was very hesitant about it, since Elizabeth looked like a damsel in distress on the cover art cirulating the internet shown above. I also saw some gifs that basically showed her getting taken, or begging the protagonist . Er, not cool guys. Then Ken Levine, the creator, admitted he wasn't interested in marketing the game to women, and that the target demographic for the advertising was the typical frat guy. Great. I mean, it made sense, gamer nerds were gonna buy it regardless of how it was marketed and they wanted to draw in some new fans, but stillm just frat guys? Not sorority girls? Or any type of "normal" woman?
Then the trailer came out. By this time I was sold(ish), but again, it showed Elizabeth about to be hanged, and the protagonist rescuing her. While she did nothing. Awesome.
Anyway, seeing Elizabeth largely shown as a helpless woman to be rescued and protected rubbed me the wrong way, despite my friends telling me she was gonna be awesome and useful. Then the game came out and surprise, she was a strong, independent woman and not at all a damsel! Yay!
When I started playing, she immediately struck me as strong willed. There was nothing weak about her. She seemed like the love child of Disney princesses Rapunzel and Belle - in voice, appearance, and character traits. That's not a terrible thing when you realize how strong both those women were.
And since the game only allows you to carry two weapons at a time, and doesn't let you carry any health kits or phials of salts (Infinite's version of Eve hypos), I certainly appreciated her throwing those things at me during combat. But it would have been even cooler if she participated in the fighting as well. That system would have been much better than one that makes the player rely on her for everything. Men in the 50's relied on women for a lot of things, didn't make those women their equals.
Is it just me or does she look like Wonder Woman?
She does revive you when you "die," rather than have the game send you to a Vita Chamber, but women have been healers in games, especially RPGs, for decades. Healer may be a step above "damsel," but it's still not exactly progressive.
It is true that the game isn't one huge escort mission, which is a step up from the last Bioshock games. God I hated escorting that little girl toward the end. Seriously, that sucked, and I'm awful at escort missions. It's good that she (mysteriously) never gets hurt, ever, and doesn't need to be protected.
That said, Elizabeth isn't entirely without flaw from a feminist standpoint. As a character, she's strong, capable, and ambitious. But despite people arguing that Infinite is her story, not Booker's, I can't help be seeing that more often than not, she's an object to be acted upon. She's put in a tower to protect her, and seemingly to protect others from her. She's rescued from that tower. She's taken again and things are done to her. This whole story is about what's done to her. As Anita Sarkeesian said in her first video about damsels in distress (no I haven't seen the second as it was taken down before I could see it, but I'm keeping my eyes open), "it's been said that in the game of patriarchy, women aren't the opposing team, they're the ball." Elizabeth does get tossed back and forth, and from man to man, for various reasons. This doesn't reduce her to a weak, helpless character, but rather strips an otherwise capable woman of her own agency.
Elizabeth is not an annoying, useless, weak dolt that exists solely as an objective, but she does fit the basic definition of "damsel in distress," in that she is captured and needs to await rescue. The fact that she does act with some agency during combat, and the fact that she can pick locks for the player/protagonist does help detract from her objecitification, but I don't think it balances it out completely.
Elizabeth, in some ways - mostly in terms of her characterization - does show us how far women in video games have come. In other ways, she's a lot like women in ealier video games. She's strong, but still needs to be rescued. She's not on the sidelines, but she's not exactly in the middle of the action either. She's a supporting character, not the protagonist. She's a step up from the Little Sisters in the ealier games, but she's not exactly at the top of the staircase. She's great, I'd definitely cosplay as her, but we still have a long way to go.
On a slightly unrelated note, I would like to praise this series featuring female scientists in at least two of their games. You had Dr. Tennenbaum in the first game, and Lutece in this one. For games that took place so long ago, having women of science play prominent roles in the backstory is pretty awesome.
But enough of these white women. It's intersectionality time! It's also spoiler time. I tried to avoid them, but alas, I can't talk about Daisy Fitzroy without giving something away.
I noticed that racism is a prominent theme in the game; we, the modern gamers, are supposed to know that that's wrong. It's there to illustrate that Columbia, while beautiful, has an evil and creepy side. Much like I'm sure Rapture did before it went down the tubes (no pun intended). It's supposed to Columbia, not us, who think that Daisy Fitzroy (still one of the few prominent women of color in mainstream gaming) is evil. We're even supposed to support the radica uprising, although we're only aiding it to get the airship back.
Then why does Daisy become the enemy? Elizabeth has to kill her to keep from killing a child, and the final battle involves fighting off the Vox and destorying their zeppelins in order to protect your ship. If Levine wasn't such a fan of racists, why did he write a black radical to be so violent that she's a vile, child-murdering antagonist who needs to be killed? If the game was really anti-racist, why does the Voxpopuli turn against Booker and Elizabeth so quickly, despite Booker supposedly being a martyr? Well, I remember the stated reasons, I'm more questioning the writing choices than the characers' choices.
The Uncharted franchise is notorious for putting people of color in antagonistic roles.
This may only be slightly problematic if video games in general had plenty of racial equality, people of color were usually present without being enemies, and nerd culture wasn't chock full of white privilege. Sadly, this isn't the case, and the racism in this game's storyline is at best more of the same, following a not-so-great trend in modern video games.
As a feminist, it's great to see women in general placed in prominent roles in video games, even if they're not protagonists. From an intersectionality perspective, however, it's disheartening to see a woman of color in such a negative portrayal of black radicals.
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
Zatanna: My New Comic Book Love
First I read Wonder Woman, the cliche feminist go-to. I liked it.
Then I started reading Batgirl, and fell in love with Gail Simone's writing.
And now I'm in love with Zatanna.
Not an easy book to find, mind you. Volume 2 of the series is the only book still in print, and no one had it. Not Comicopia, not New England Comics, not Newbury Comics. But wanting to support a local comic book shop and not just order it from Amazon, when Comicopia offered to order it for me I enthusiastically accepted the favor. And it was worth the wait!
A comic that centers around a woman? Yes! A story about a creepy, possessed marionette? Hell to the yes! A female magician? Oh yeah! Well not magician, sorceress that does magic shows . . . and it's never clarified if the audience knows about her powers . . . but still, yay!
Really my only complaint is the way she's constantly sexualized. Her usual outfit wasn't too problematic, although I dunno, pants would be nice. But in some of the chapters her breasts were insane. Not all of them, sometimes she had normal sized boobs, but what purpose did those melons serve? And then the fan art is all about sexy sexy sex times, further reducing her to a sex object. The fandom seems to be mostly male and mostly concerned with her appearance than her character or the stories told in the books.
really?
seriously?
Oh come on . . .
. . . she had better be doing an escape act here!
Look! Pants! Finally!
Zatanna: Because a successful female magician is so inconcievable, she only exists in comic books.
Well sort of. I know there are female magicians out there, but I once heard that there is not one female magician with her own show in Vegas. I went to a magic bar that sold black shirts that said "escape artist" - "for the boys," the headliner said; and "for the girls," they had pink shirts that said "I <3 [the magician's name]" Don't get me wrong, I did really like him, as do many young ladies, but the way the shirts were gendered rubbed me the wrong way, and ultimately reminded me how far south I'd traveled. I want to take this moment to talk about women in magic, and keep in mind that magic is tengentially related to nerd culture, there seems to be a considerable overlap between the two interests.
Part of the problem lies in the way women's clothing is designed. Dresses and women's suits are fitted and rarely have functional pockets, leaving little room for women to hide things. Women tend to have small hands, making sleight of hands illusions especially difficult (yet I still can't palm anything smaller than a quarter). While women are never actively discouraged from pursuing magic, they're not exactly encouraged either. A lack of female magicians out there mean that lots of girls don't even consider learning magic, and girls are still socialized not to be too outlandish or "attention seeking," because it's not ladylike to show off the way boys do with their magic tricks. And if those shirts at the magic bar say anything, it's that we just don't expect women to be interested in things like magic and escape artistry, their role is that of a groupie or, if they're lucky, the lovely assistant.
(Don't get me wrong, I loved being called up on stage that night; if it happened again I would not complain in the slightest)
Er, I guess that's it really. Obstacles, not cool. If would be awesome if the series addressed the gender disparity in the magic world, maybe showing Zatanna deal with sexism from male magicians. Maybe it has happned, but it's not gonna be cheap to track down the back issues or out-of-print graphic novels, gotta get a new job first to see what happened in Every Day Magic and Zatanna vol. 1. But if it hasn't happened in her story, it probably won't, since the series that centers around her has been disconinued. Zatanna was not part of the New 52 series of reboots. Maybe it's time to start writing some fan fiction.
Anyway, the series is not overtly feminist, nor are most of the fans, but I'd say the series is worth checking out if you're looking for something new to read.
Saturday, May 4, 2013
The lack of women on Free Comic Book Day
If you're looking for an intellectual, unbiased, well thought out analysis, keep looking because I'll be honest this is a bit more more anecdotal than some of my other writing, and I'll admit I haven't written in a while. And it's a bit, shall we say "whiney." You have been warned.
Today was Free Comic Book Day, my first in fact. I went to the local New England Comics to see what they had to offer. It was a pretty good deal, really. They were giving out a free Tick comic, plus two from the table and an additional two from a box at the end of the table. Five total. Plus a ton of great deals throughout the store, almost everything was on sale, so I got my fill of books for a while. Although Comicopia just got my Zatanna book in (Volume 2, currently the only Zatanna book in print >_< why has it been so friggin difficult to find this damn book?) so that'll be a priority when I'm able to pick it up. Speaking of comics featuring female protagonists, they were scarce. There was an Aphrodite comic on the table, which I picked up even though I've never heard of the series, but all the other books featured men heavily or exclusively. I also snagged an X-Men comic from the box since it featured Storm on the cover. I don't read X-Men that often but I do like that, despite the title, they do feature women pretty well. Or maybe that's just the impression I got in my Women of Marvel book - maybe those issues were the exception to the rule.
And while checking out the comics, the trend carried over to most of the store. All of the action figures were men, all of the special harcover books on sale were about dudes, and the Buffy books in that display were on the second to last shelf - I almost didn't see them. Yes, we have Wonder Woman, we have Batgirl, we have Buffy and Black Widow and Supergirl and Zatanna (barely), and they are awesome characters. Their presence counts, but it doesn't count that much when their male counterparts are still the ones dominating center stage.
I realize that it's not fair to only read comics about female characters, and trust me I don't limit myself in that way. I just seek them out more actively because I do identify more with Batgirl and Wonder Woman than I do, say Spider Man. I still read comics about men, just less frequently. Besdies, I'm voting with my wallet, I know I'm one consumer but if I can contribute to the demand for more badass women in comics, maybe more will be published. One can only hope.
Now, there were girls in the store! Not a lot, the store was still mostly dudes, but so often I'm the only girl in the comic book shop (unless it's Newbury Comics, but that doesn't really count these days, especially the one in Fannuel Hall which at any given time these days is loaded with high school kids let loose on a field trip) that it's refreshing. And two of the kids, the cutest little ones in the store, were African American - and yes, this is significant to point out, since nerd culture may be becoming more egalitarian gender-wise but it's still overwhelmingly white, which is arguably an even bigger problem.
So while things are getting better, but if Free Comic Book Day 2013 is any indicator of how things are progressing, we still have a long way to go.
Today was Free Comic Book Day, my first in fact. I went to the local New England Comics to see what they had to offer. It was a pretty good deal, really. They were giving out a free Tick comic, plus two from the table and an additional two from a box at the end of the table. Five total. Plus a ton of great deals throughout the store, almost everything was on sale, so I got my fill of books for a while. Although Comicopia just got my Zatanna book in (Volume 2, currently the only Zatanna book in print >_< why has it been so friggin difficult to find this damn book?) so that'll be a priority when I'm able to pick it up. Speaking of comics featuring female protagonists, they were scarce. There was an Aphrodite comic on the table, which I picked up even though I've never heard of the series, but all the other books featured men heavily or exclusively. I also snagged an X-Men comic from the box since it featured Storm on the cover. I don't read X-Men that often but I do like that, despite the title, they do feature women pretty well. Or maybe that's just the impression I got in my Women of Marvel book - maybe those issues were the exception to the rule.
(my haul, of the day, plus cat)
And while checking out the comics, the trend carried over to most of the store. All of the action figures were men, all of the special harcover books on sale were about dudes, and the Buffy books in that display were on the second to last shelf - I almost didn't see them. Yes, we have Wonder Woman, we have Batgirl, we have Buffy and Black Widow and Supergirl and Zatanna (barely), and they are awesome characters. Their presence counts, but it doesn't count that much when their male counterparts are still the ones dominating center stage.
I realize that it's not fair to only read comics about female characters, and trust me I don't limit myself in that way. I just seek them out more actively because I do identify more with Batgirl and Wonder Woman than I do, say Spider Man. I still read comics about men, just less frequently. Besdies, I'm voting with my wallet, I know I'm one consumer but if I can contribute to the demand for more badass women in comics, maybe more will be published. One can only hope.
Now, there were girls in the store! Not a lot, the store was still mostly dudes, but so often I'm the only girl in the comic book shop (unless it's Newbury Comics, but that doesn't really count these days, especially the one in Fannuel Hall which at any given time these days is loaded with high school kids let loose on a field trip) that it's refreshing. And two of the kids, the cutest little ones in the store, were African American - and yes, this is significant to point out, since nerd culture may be becoming more egalitarian gender-wise but it's still overwhelmingly white, which is arguably an even bigger problem.
So while things are getting better, but if Free Comic Book Day 2013 is any indicator of how things are progressing, we still have a long way to go.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)