Topic: The Koopalings promote misogyny?

Well sure. However I don't see the value in nitpicking someone trying to make a particular point you don't agree with for a cause you generally support. All it does is allow some people to validate an even more extreme position. And I'm not about to argue in support of a particular point I don't really agree with. The better option is to just acknowledge that said debate is toxic and be ready to bail before things get messy.

All I have to say about this entire thing is video games shouldn't be taken so... literally, I guess? People/groups get offended about stuff in video games and they shouldn't. Video games promote almost nothing besides playing more video games. They don't promote sexism, violence, racism, abusing animals (ugh... PETA), or any type of discrimination, really. Video games exist as a form of entertainment that one can enjoy, not as a type of propaganda. Even if a character design is... misleading, for lack of a better word, that doesn't make it sexist, that's just the design someone came up with to represent a certain character, not a design intended to take a hit on the feminist community or something.

But anyway, that's my two cents. I have never and probably will never be offended by a video game, because I don't take them seriously (well, I do, but not on a personal level, if that makes sense).

Again I have to ask if you've actually seen the video and actually listened to it. Her issue isn't with the actions of players her issue is with the people making these games who decide to enable this kind of content and asking them to consider why this is. Ultimately that is who she's really targeting: people who make games, but it's also good for players to think about what they play and why. The fact that this topic even exists says a lot about the state of the "culture" - tropes aren't even thought of, you just take them for granted and assume they're okay.

I strongly suggest watching all of her tropes videos, there's some interesting things being said there that most men wouldn't even register, why? Because we're used to society being centered around us. Stop for a moment and consider how you would feel if it was the other way. Rather than uselessly nit-picking the messenger check out the message.

@ReindeerDasher, I don't think anyone is saying anyone intended to offend anyone, it's about the banality of it. It's questioning why these things are they way they are and why they're not questioned and it comes down to who has the power to make these decisions and why these decisions are made.

As the late great godfather of soul once said " This is a man's world". Still holds true to this day unfortunately.

@Sean_Aaron Out of curiosity; @geonjaha made a valid point. Even if the video is questioning the designer's choice of giving the playing the option to kill a stripper, shouldn't the point question the designer's choice of giving the player the option to kill a person in general? I think that's what bothers some, and is definitely why I disagree with her. If she wanted to make a valid point, she should've questioned the ability to murder people in video games in general, not just women, or strippers.

Although, by that point you're questioning 80% of the video games out there, I don't know how effective that would be.

It's because the difference is that often when women are killed they are sexualised. That's pretty much the point of that particular video: women are disposable and they're sex objects and even in death they are often sexualised, consciously or not. In games where you kill loads of dudes there isn't the same treatment. It's more apparent in the video.

And her videos are about tropes regarding women in games, she isn't making a judgement call on violent games in general, that's a different topic for discussion. It's about the fact that there is a lot of women as "disposable sex object" in games. I don't think her point is any less valid because she doesn't have a broader agenda.

Male gamer rage has turned this softball social commentator into a successful feminist icon. People have forgotten all about her kickstarter commitments. It's quite amusing.

The funny thing is that the game you're referencing here is wildly sexist. Peach's powers in Super Princess Peach derive from stereotypical female mood swings.

I think it's been proven consistently that both sides of this debate need to be shot at this point, for the sake of the intelligence and dignity of the human race. Or at least send them both to Extremist Island and don't give them a way back to society.

That being said, while I refuse to comment on this, I will point out that Nintendo lately has done an excellent job at having more focus on female characters and the like without acting like it's a big deal and they are waaaaay ahead of most of the industry in this regard.

Super Princess Peach has the Power of PMS..... Get this, besides saving mario you also have to get back a "vibe" scepter. Towards the end of that game there is text describing that this Vibe scepter can maybe even be found in your own home and could be why your mom is randomly happy some days. Yes ladies and gentlemen, they suggest that princess peach and mothers everywhere have that special toy.

You know, this is the exact kind of fatigue I feel whenever this debate comes up. Thanks for summing things up in a way I can agree 100%.

@Geonjaha My hero. swoons

Stereotypes are simply generalizations used to showcase certain recognizable characters. Sexist would be if the game actually said that Peach's mood swings were part of her being a woman, and if this was somehow used to devalue her status as a (virtual) living being.
Instead, they're deliberately played for laughs, and never reference it as a feminine trait. It's more emphasizing towards her innocence as a person, since she normally supresses such emotions (the most we've seen of her is schock in many Mario games).
Besides, burning rage is pretty damn metal, and equally accounted for as a manly and a womanly emotion.

The reason Mario games are part of the issue is that they constantly re-enforce the trope of ‘damsel in distress’. Even when they used Peach as a character in 3D World they still captured a female who couldn’t save herself from a glass bottle. It seemingly makes the woman powerless, and can only be rescued by the male protagonist, hence, women can only be saved by men. The problem is when it’s switched around and the female is the protagonist, ala Super Princess Peach or Lollipop Chainsaw, there is still the power dominated relationship. One is saving the other. Regardless, re-gendering aspects of the trope (which in video games began with Nintendo), it does lead to the empowerment of women as these games change the perceptions of women in video games.

Because only females can feel Joy, Gloom, Rage and Calm.

Also kudos to Sean for discussing the issue incredibly well.

Again I have to ask if you've actually seen the video and actually listened to it. Her issue isn't with the actions of players her issue is with the people making these games who decide to enable this kind of content and asking them to consider why this is.

Sorry I'm a little out of breath from chasing this moving goalpost. You said:

And her use of game imagery isn't out of context, it directly supports her point. I've had an online poster argue with the use of footage from Hitman killing strippers saying "oh you're not supposed to do that," missing the point (which she makes in video) that the issue isn't whether a player is "supposed" to do that, but the fact that the player CAN and without any meaningful penalty.

So this wasn't her point? Because as I've said, if it is her point, why are strippers an exception? The player CAN kill any character, and all these kills do have a meaningful penalty.

Apparently though, as a man I just don't understand. Handling this objectively doesn't seem to work and somehow I just have to listen and believe to her point despite all her evidence being terrible.

I think this is a dangerous argument. Let's face it, people are stupid. We try to silence racists, sexists, homophobes, etc. because people actually listen to their worthless bigotry and agrees with them. I have never heard a single argument against black people, women or LGBTQ people that aren't crap, but I would prefer that no one heard those arguments, because I know there are a lot of people out there who are stupid enough to buy the crap.

Someone gave a very interesting argument about Super Princess Peach that's relevant here; Peach isn't having mood swings, she's the only one actually able to control her emotions.

The whole game is one where everyone (male and female alike) is being controlled by almost random mood swings. The enemies are the one being uncontrollably happy, sad, angry, etc.

Then again, the ending might be more arguably 'controversial' than the content:

So how did YOU feel about this last adventure?

One thing about the scepter: no one knows who created it or why, but...

Somewhere, someone might possibly be using it right now...

...What?

Your dad got mad at you the other day, you say?

Your mom's been laughing happily a lot?

Maybe... Just maybe... The Vibe Scepter is hidden away in your house somewhere...

As for the other stuff:

No, the Koopalings don't promote anything. The one female Koopaling is about as competent (maybe more so) than the male ones.

No, most Nintendo games don't really have much in the way of 'sexist' concepts. In fact, quite a few of the examples used by the video's commentator (like Dixie Kong in Donkey Kong Country 2 and 3) are exactly how a good female protagonist should be portrayed; as equally competent as the male characters and without being 'objectified'. Also of note; all the Nintendo games that never come up in these arguments. I guess using characters like Captain Syrup or some of the WarioWare cast might utterly destroy their fragile foundations most 'feminist' arguments are based on.

As for this:

I think this is a dangerous argument. Let's face it, people are stupid. We try to silence racists, sexists, homophobes, etc. because people actually listen to their worthless bigotry and agrees with them. I have never heard a single argument against black people, women or LGBTQ people that aren't crap, but I would prefer that no one heard those arguments, because I know there are a lot of people out there who are stupid enough to buy the crap.

If you believe this, you are seriously what is wrong with society. It's a far more slippery slope to censor anything than just try and fight it with education and rationality.

Especially because... well, it's all too easy to turn censorship into a tool of oppression against any minority group or opinion, not just those some side or another thinks are 'wrong'. There's a very good political comment about that somewhere, but I'm not posting it here.

Sorry, I didn't express myself clearly. I am not saying that censorship is the way to go. I believe a rational debate is the obvious way to go, but sometimes the rational debate doesn't work, and people are still swayed to work against others rights. In those cases I'd rather the oppressing side stay silent and I'd rather people stop listening to them. I find it ridiculous that we even have to debate equality. So I do not condone censorship, but I think the argument I responded to is weak, because it implies that people always listen to reason, which isn't the case.

You're right. Most games don't. But some games do, and it's those games that are the problem here. Weird placement for WarioWare btw seeing as it's a mini-game compilation. These arguments do not have fragile foundations. The tropes used against women have been in many mediums prior to video games. Books, film, TV, etc. the problem here is why is it still being done.

I realised into writing this the video linked has Anita talk about Ms. Male Characters, and so most of the stuff I have/had written out doesn't fit here.

Also, below is the part that the TP is talking about.

However, when designers choose to use the Ms. Male Character trope and its associated visual stereotypes to specifically distinguish female characters from the rest of the cast in a fictional context, it has a few negative consequences.

One repercussion of constantly relying on feminizing signifiers for character design is that it tends to reinforce a strict binary form of gender expression. The gender binary is an entirely artificial and socially constructed division of male and female into two distinctly separate and opposing classes of human being. The gender binary also erases the continuum of gender presentations and identities that fall outside of the rigid masculine/feminine false dichotomy.

And within that strict binary women are “marked” while men get to remain largely “unmarked”.

In the Mario franchise, the Koopalings were originally described as Bowser’s seven children, all of them are male except for one named Wendy O Koopa. We know she is female because her designers used practically every hyper-feminine frill and accessory available to separate her from her male siblings.

Wendy’s six brothers, by contrast, are “unmarked” by gendered identifiers which means they get to be presented in a variety of creative ways. Ludwig’s design communicates intelligence and arrogance, while Lemmy’s reveals his playfulness and Iggy’s makes him seem maniacal and a little unbalanced. Sadly, Wendy’s identity is limited by the fact that she is covered in superficial gendered signifiers. One look at her and you know she’s female, but not much else.

As with many Ms Male Characters, her defining characteristic is her gender.

Wendy also suffers from a parallel condition I like to call “Personality Female Syndrome” wherein female characters are reduced to a one dimensional personality type consisting of nothing more than a collection of shallow stereotypes about women. She is vain, spoiled, bratty and quick to anger.

Clip- “Reptiles in the Rose Garden”
“I don’t care! I want America for my birthday! I want it, I want it, I want it!”

When female characters are “marked” by obligatory stereotypical identifiers it actively limits the range of available options by enforcing a narrow, restrictive and monolithic model for the portrayal of femininity. Meanwhile, since male characters are allowed to be unmarked it permits a much wider array of possibilities for their designs.

I should note that even though pink and purple are strong gendered indicators when combined with other feminizing visual markers those colors are not the exclusive domain of women. An expanded color-palette is something we do see applied to men on rare occasions as with Kirby, Bomberman or Roy Koopa but they are the exception to the rule and are typically only found in colorful childlike (and extremely male dominated) worlds. But if a bow, lipstick, eyeshadow or heels are placed on an otherwise male-identified character the intention, or at least the result, is typically a homophobic or transphobic joke.

Clip- Super Punch-Out
“Heike Kagero!
Fight!”

There are a few optional design accessories for men like neckties or baseball caps but they don’t hold the same significance. They are not ubiquitous or strictly enforced, and are never really used to “mark” men as “not female” in larger fictional universes dominated by women.

And it's very true.

I didn't watch the vid because I don't have speakers connected to this computer but Distaff counterparts usually tend to get the short end of the stick. They are normally not designed with very much depth aside from being "character you recognize with breasts now" and even when creators try to make them stand on their own they get sideswiped by fans or corporate meddling. To make matters worse its hard just to go "hey we will make a game/movie/whatever staring a female and no one will have an issue due to gender and we don't to resort to the sex sells method to make it plausible". That of course doesn't mean that we don't have strong female leads that stand alone in games or in supporting roles that don't diminish their character. However it is still slow going. However I personally feel that people often get so caught up in the "majority/privileged= freedom" that we don't fight for both sides. I'm sure there are men that get annoyed with the chiseled, thirty something, light skinned guy being the lead...because most people don't look like that period. And I think even the few that DO look like that want to see somebody else sometimes...