Tropes Vs Women - Ms Male Character

Feminist Frequency published the video Ms. Male Character - Tropes vs Women in Video Games in November of 2013. Since then it has been viewed more than 1.1 million times. Nice to notice that while still not allowing comments, this video does allow viewers to "like" or "dislike" the content. Founder Anita Sarkeesian is again presenting her lumbersexual look, this time with a pink-and-blue checkered flannel shirt. Perhaps this shirt was deliberately chosen with her perceived place on the "gender continuum" in mind.

The reason I am deconstructing FemFreq's videos, such as here, and here, and Sarkeesian herself, such as here and here is not just because of #Gamergate. #Gamergate will evolve and grow and become something else, but what I call the SJW Overwatch will still be with us. They will be with us for as long as future Overwatch shock troops keep receiving marxist indoctrination in our universities. They will graduate and take their speech codes and "only yes means yes" revocation of due process for males with them into the wider culture.

I will say that this particular FemFreq video is worth watching just for the eighties advertisements and the New Wave influences on fashion that are on display. For that reason alone, I will click the "like" button on this video. You are welcome, Anita!

Sarkeesian starts her video off with her usual disclaimer, "it's entirely possible to be critical of some aspects of a piece of media, while still finding other parts valuable or enjoyable." It might be possible, Anita, but it's not likely, because once someone like you has pointed out that what they enjoy is problematic, the entirety of the experience is devalued. And I seriously doubt you yourself derive any "enjoyment" whatsoever out of the media you are "criticizing." If you are attuned to gender disparagement, that's all you will notice.

Ms. Male Character spends a fair amount of time discussing Ms. Pac-Man. Up until viewing this video, I would not have found it possible to take offense at Ms. Pac-Man, but Sarkeesian does, calling her design just "Pac-Man with a bow." Sarkeesian says there was "an 11th-hour move designed to avoid potential backlash, for the third cutscene in which a child was born out of wedlock." That this statement is missing a modifier doesn't make it any less ludicrous. Adding the cutscene depicting Junior arriving "out of wedlock" was a move designed to "avoid potential backlash?"

Sarkeesian tells us that the reason these "feminizing gendered signifiers" are used is to convey to the consumer that this character is female, as they are part of our "culture's visual vocabulary." Sarkeesian asserts that these signifiers are "arbitrary and abstract. There's nothing about a bow...that's intrinsically feminine." She may be right. If she put a bow in her hair for these videos, I probably would still not discern any intrinsically feminine qualities about her.

The reason that employing these feminizing signifiers is problematic, according to Anita, is that they "reinforce strict binary forms of gender expression. The gender binary is an entirely artificial and socially constructed division of male and female into two distinctly separate...classes of human being." Nonsense. Progressives like Anita love to talk about how they believe in science and reason over faith and superstition, but too often they display the same credulity of social sciences that they mock in those leading spiritual lives.

Recent research in biology is pretty clear that there is a gender binary. Little boys like to play with trucks and it's not because they are indoctrinated by pernicious cultural forces. Research shows that chemical and hormonal exposure in utero influences play preferences and even sexual orientation.