Ah thanks, saw it a couple of time on Netflix but never clicked on it. Will try it!
Anita Sarkeesian has disclosed what she has done with the Kickstarter money
- Thread starter crimsonheadGCN
- Start date
- Status
Ah thanks, saw it a couple of time on Netflix but never clicked on it. Will try it!
Sorry that first line was actually supposed to be a joke. I'm not accusing you of defending Internet trolls.
Ah sorry, Poe's law.
airmangataosenai
Member
It's hardly a surprise, this has always been the means by which she's received funding. Even for the Kickstarter she used tweets from random anonymous misogynists to illustrate her point. She has a weird symbiotic relationship with these manchildren. Without them she wouldn't have the career or fame she has now.
tonysidaway
Member
You were wrong. For instance the GDC event last year police sniffer dogs were called in after the bomb threat. Remember that if a threat is made to commit murder in order to intimidate, that also is a serious crime in most jurisdictions, for obvious reasons. You're wasting your time and ours trying to pretend that these outrages are just business as usual.
Oh I'm not saying it's not a crime. I'm saying that it's pretty common for celebrities and personalities to get them. Hate mail is not really a new idea.
I dont really get the bomb threat thing though. I was wrong about what?
It would have been funnier if she'd just released this:
It would (and it would have been commendable) but that would require a sense of humor and for one of those you've had to have had an independent thought ever and, frankly, I just don't see it with Herr Sarkesian.
dream
Member
See, I oscillate a lot on how I feel about Sarkeesian's work. Most of the time, I find myself thinking that much of it is fairly simplistic, bordering on shoddy, but at the same time, I'm glad she's doing it because it sparks vital conversations that need to happen.
I don't, however, think that the shortcomings of Tropes vs. Women is a reflection on her ability to create these sorts of discourses though. Her enterprise is really tricky because it has to bridge two things that the GamerGate fuckery has shown us are very much incompatible: scholarship and gamers. Academics don't take gamers seriously, and I think there is a shared belief amongst people who most loudly identify as "gamers" that games shouldn't be examined through a critical lens. Which not only puts Sarkeesian in a really shitty no-win position, but it also means that whatever she produces under this umbrella has to be dumbed down in order to reach skeptical audiences on both sides.
So I think you're right--whoever jumps into discussions of gender in gaming is automatically so handicapped that it makes it almost impossible to break any critical ground. That's the real problem to me.
ya I know how her brain works too I lived there for a while.
good point u just made A+ for content and effort nice touch on the allusion to hitler m8
stay mad tho kid 4 real
Nope, Gamergate thread. To quote:
You are doing this again and again, and I do wonder why.
hahaha, really?
Winterfang
Banned
I'm watching her videos thanks to this thread. I don't agree with everything a 100% but she presents a good case, with visual evidence on her point. I wish the videos dedicated a more time to show gaming example that break the trope, feels like it's just a couple of indie games.
Messofanego
Banned
That's why these videos are a thing, to make us realise how widespread the problem is that very few games actually break the tropes.
No idea. Just a subject that come around and I question? I really have no idea. Sorry if that bothers you. I do think it's a good subject to talk about though.
I posted something similar in the Exploding Kittens Kickstarter thread, but she isn't obliged to do anything more than promised in the initial kickstarter. I didn't back this, but if I did I wouldn't have a problem with her keeping the money for herself.
I'm sure she made some worthwhile points in her videos, but they are so dry and boring I've never made it through one of them.
I'm sure she made some worthwhile points in her videos, but they are so dry and boring I've never made it through one of them.
Alex_Mexico
Member
She IS going to make at least one video (apparently now it'll be a series?) where she talks about positive examples. It's been on her Kickstarter page from day one.
The point of those other videos, however, is to point out how widespread some negative examples continue to exist and that's what she's focusing on.
Winterfang
Banned
I'm currently watching the third part of the damsel In distress video. I'm looking forward to that part.
Maastricht
Member
Coming from an age when feminism was a much bigger thing, and my parents were active in it but were wise enough to focus on 'emancipation' of both sexes which I think is ultimately a better way of going about this, because my problem with videogames is how few games break *any* tropes. But that is also my criticism of what I've seen of her work so far - they are almost devoid of context (a Mafia or Godfather game needn't rise above the source material) or contrast (how about a game like Dragon Age to show what can be done). My wife will never make it past part I because (apart from that she's not a great speaker) the first part was incredibly boring to her, she felt it was almost just a ploy to enable watching sex scenes, in a sense making them worse than the source material, because taken out of context completely. They make me want to write articles or make videos like these myself on this subject, because I feel it could be done much better. And there's the biggest plus I think of her work - regardless of the quality, it makes people - and apparently game developers and publishers - more aware of how boring and/or unsophisticated they allow themselves to be.
People constantly toss this out there and it's not accurate. The average woman doesn't walk around in constant fear, terrified for her life. That's just ridiculous.
Messofanego
Banned
I think it's about the frequency of these tropes because you're not going to get past tropes but these ones have been continuing in media for so long.
I don't know if her videos were helpful for developers or not in enacting progress (Bioshock devs have chimed in of appreciating the criticism), but last year there were a few great female protagonists. Dreamfall Chapters, Never Alone, Marvellous Miss Take, Last of Us Left Behind.
KnockOneOff
Banned
Whatever happened that to that mincraft convention scam? Does anyone know if anything came of that?
I dunno about "average". It's certainly common in some cities.
I dunno that "it's hard for me to believe that therefore it's false" is useful.
Shrike_Priest
Member
Druckmann explicitly stated in one of his keynotes that the first Tropes vs Women-videos were an inspiration for how he wrote TLOU.
That's another thing I don't get about the criticism towards Anita's argument. One of the most common ones is "She doesn't offer solutions! She's just hating!" However, the obvious solution is: hey, games writers, don't resort to these tired tropes. . And when they don't resort to those tropes they are forced to write a more novel narrative and use female characters in ways they often haven't before.
Developers who watch FF can make that conclusion on their own, she doesn't have to tell them.
If she'd come out with a list saying: "this is exactly how you should write instead of Trope X," I'm pretty sure she would be getting even more critique for limiting creative freedom.
She is not a developer, it's not her role to develop games. But highlighting shitty practices in games-writing makes developers more aware of pitfalls they didn't realize before (the Bioshock-example above is perfect). Anita should not be prescribing solutions, that's for the creative people of this industry to solve.
It is ridiculous when you present it as a straw man. No, women do not walk around in constant crippling fear, but they do experience more fear than men.
While the study below is merely one indicator of "fear", it goes a pretty long way to showing how men and women have different levels of fear in their daily lives. Couple this with the studies that show that women experience more harassment online, and you have a situation where their experience of threats lead to far more serious conclusions than those thrown around in a DOTA-game.
"In 93 of the 105 countries and areas surveyed, women are significantly less likely than men to say they feel safe walking alone at night in the city or area where they live. While this is not that surprising, the striking differences between men and women in some developed countries are. There is at least a 20-percentage-point difference between men and women in 21 countries, including Canada, France, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States."
Messofanego
Banned
That's rad to hear! Agreed with highlighting rather than prescribing. The rest is left to your own choices.
It is ridiculous when you present it as a straw man. No, women do not walk around in constant crippling fear, but they do experience more fear than men.
While the study below is merely one indicator of "fear", it goes a pretty long way to showing how men and women have different levels of fear in their daily lives. Couple this with the studies that show that women experience more harassment online, and you have a situation where their experience of threats lead to far more serious conclusions than those thrown around in a DOTA-game.
"In 93 of the 105 countries and areas surveyed, women are significantly less likely than men to say they feel safe walking alone at night in the city or area where they live. While this is not that surprising, the striking differences between men and women in some developed countries are. There is at least a 20-percentage-point difference between men and women in 21 countries, including Canada, France, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States."
Awesome. Now what does that have to do with what I stated? Being afraid to walk alone at night and being in constant fear and terrified for their lives aren't even remotely similar statements.
And there was no straw man, the poster I quoted claimed exactly that and I said it wasn't true. He's also not the first person around here who has said as much.
Maastricht
Member
I have now watched the first two videos, and I don't think the underlying problem to me isn't necessarily the tropes, especially because they are taken so out of context. You can't on the one hand take Red Dead Redemption as showing that women are only for showing how men are evil, and on the other hand ignore that probably the first major character you encounter in the game is a strong independent woman, therewith already transcending almost the entire body of Westerns ever made, which is a major achievement especially as treating such subjects well in a gaming world is much harder anyway. And you can't on the one hand complain that violence against women is common and a bad thing, but on the other hand it shouldn't be used to characterise those that do it as evil, because it is not realistic enough. In many of the situations presented to us, you are not meant to watch any violence play out, but you are meant to intervene, and the major reason why the scene plays out if you don't intervene is to show your actions matter. In GTA, at the very least mention that the example of being able to use a prostitute, then murder and rob her is a long standing symbol for the series as that the game doesn't limit your options. You can do anything to anyone, basically. The major problem with the game *is* in fact that you can't play a female character and visit a Chippendale's show, say. Contrary to AS, I do think equal opportunity objectification is part of the solution, because of the simple fact that it is scientifically problem that wacthing sex and anything related arouses both sexes, and media should be allowed to appeal to our baser instincts even if they are justly criticised when they pander to them.
In general, imho the biggest problems with Western games is that games are still far too much targeted at men, and that many of them are created in the context of a completely screwed up balance between the way society treats violence and sex in general, amplified by the fact that anything related to sex is much harder to properly gamify than violence. In this context, where you can publish a game where you can depict murder and torture without any restrictions to what you show and do, but any form of detail about consensual sex is sure to land you in trouble both in the press and with publishers makes the topic of women related tropes almost a mere footnote.
In that context, I would like to add a new general test towards media along the lines of women talking to women about anything other than men (which I may point out fails a lot of RomComs targeted directly at women, so I know any such rules have limitations
but they are still good and simple tests to help you think about a game)."If you take out all the violence, do you still have a good game?"
Personally, I think this is a lofty goal for the industry to strive for, to make at least half of the big titles out there pass this test. The best way imho to do this is to make an option in games to make all violence skippable.
That said, I do think the rule to make female avatars available is also really important. And focus test on women more. Man, just make more Western games that appeal to women as well, because that is sure to create better and more varied experiences for men like me as well. It bothers me to no end that i can't get through playing a game even supposedly story driven adventures from TellTale because the first scene in the two games I though my wife might enjoy (Wolf Among Us and The Walking Dead) has violent QTE's (though at least The Wold Among Us doesn't have a failstate).
charlequin
Banned
You jumped into the ongoing debate with an absurd claim, misunderstanding what the post you responded to was saying and missing the thread of conversation that led to that point. The most favorable reading here is that you said something irrelevant and then got annoyed when someone tried to read it as more contextually appropriate and rebutted it.
Mesoian's claim here is that many women regularly and systemically fear for their physical safety as a direct result of their gender, and that said worry is a direct element of why they respond differently to threats of physical violence -- both of which I would hope you wouldn't argue or disagree with.
Shrike_Priest
Member
Not remotely similar? You don't see a connection between being more afraid and being in constant fear? It's a matter of scale, sure.
This is the straw man I saw: you were attacking a position which is "all women are terrified all the time", which of course is untrue. However, the position people actually have is more: "women experience considerably more fear of being attacked/harassed". If I misunderstood the claims then I apologize.
HarryHengst
Member
Yes you can. If 99% of the women in a game are trophies or sex symbols or reasons for men to act, then that is shitty writing. One well written woman does not compensate that.
Shrike_Priest
Member
That depends entirely on the purpose of the video.
The purpose is not to review RDR. It's not to say whether or not the developers of RDR are capable of producing well-written female characters. It's about demonstrating the prevalence of a trope through examples. If there is an example of a trope in a videogame, it is there. Whether or not that videogame does other things well is irrelevant, since it's not a review of that game. If it were, I'd agree you can weigh the pros and cons of the different instances of how they treat gender in it. And by that rationale might very well come to the conclusion that RDR on the whole views gender in a healthy way (I never played more than an hour or two so I don't know).
However, that is not the point of Tropes vs Women. The critique is explicitly geared towards exposing a particular set of tropes. The only way to do that is to highlight instances of it. If she had to preface each example with "But in level 4, you meet an awesome girl character devoid of any of the things I'm talking about here." the videos would be a mess.
Maastricht
Member
But if you take cherry picking to the extreme, that's the same as arguing the prevalence of the digit 4 over the other 9 in the following sequences:
0123456789
0123456789
0235602356
1478914789
You can't take things out of context just to show a pattern, except when your pattern here is to show that the digit 4 is used. But that is not what she is doing here. She is misrepresenting in order to push an agenda, which I personally I've seen more than enough of in my years as a literary scholar. That's not to say I disagree with everything she says or that I even disagree with that agenda (far from it in fact - average toy stores with pink sections drive me crazy), just that I think her work is diminished by not providing any context as much as the work of the makers of Rockstar is diminished by her misrepresentation. It is reductionist in the same way that a female version of an already abstract character is created (and I agree that merketing is a big factor here, because they tend to pander to statistics in the most horrible and unoriginal of ways) by adding hair decoration when the original game was genderless enough already to appeal to a wide audience.
Asking for subtlety of gender representation in a 16 pixel high sprite character is silly in and of itself, in the context of how much cartoons struggle with this having always had a far wider range of expression. Questioning the need of course a completely different matter, and the marketing around it completely ridiculous. Similarly, the Smurfette syndrom can't be very well applied in a military setting as a trope, when in fact it basically trailblazes reality already because in reality in active military operations women are less prevelant. But the fact there are far more games that revolve around military rather than romancing, say, is a far bigger issue (especially considering that the Japanese gaming landscape has proven that finding suitable game mechanics isn't and hasn't been an issue for a long time).
Perhaps above everything else in her work, I am disappointed by how basic and backwards the whole discussion is, where I thought we were much further along in having this discussion already that allowed for detail and nuance.
0123456789
0123456789
0235602356
1478914789
You can't take things out of context just to show a pattern, except when your pattern here is to show that the digit 4 is used. But that is not what she is doing here. She is misrepresenting in order to push an agenda, which I personally I've seen more than enough of in my years as a literary scholar. That's not to say I disagree with everything she says or that I even disagree with that agenda (far from it in fact - average toy stores with pink sections drive me crazy), just that I think her work is diminished by not providing any context as much as the work of the makers of Rockstar is diminished by her misrepresentation. It is reductionist in the same way that a female version of an already abstract character is created (and I agree that merketing is a big factor here, because they tend to pander to statistics in the most horrible and unoriginal of ways) by adding hair decoration when the original game was genderless enough already to appeal to a wide audience.
Asking for subtlety of gender representation in a 16 pixel high sprite character is silly in and of itself, in the context of how much cartoons struggle with this having always had a far wider range of expression. Questioning the need of course a completely different matter, and the marketing around it completely ridiculous. Similarly, the Smurfette syndrom can't be very well applied in a military setting as a trope, when in fact it basically trailblazes reality already because in reality in active military operations women are less prevelant. But the fact there are far more games that revolve around military rather than romancing, say, is a far bigger issue (especially considering that the Japanese gaming landscape has proven that finding suitable game mechanics isn't and hasn't been an issue for a long time).
Perhaps above everything else in her work, I am disappointed by how basic and backwards the whole discussion is, where I thought we were much further along in having this discussion already that allowed for detail and nuance.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
What's the fear you think that poll was referring to? Breaking a heel and their mascara running?
Giving money to a KickStarter project isn't an investment, it's a donation.
That means you're not a stockholder, or her boss. You don't need a salary breakdown.
Did you even put money into it?
Haunted
Member
Conan-san
Banned
(Today, 08:00 AM)
Oh man, he must've felt so clever for that one as well. :lol
Haunted
Member
I wish I could remember specifics, but I've read at least two accounts of team leaders showing their (design)-team FF videos to inspire more awareness for the issue and reporting that it opened a lot of eyes and caused them to look over some of the designs once again to improve them (was it Bioware? Naughty Dog?) I honestly forgot.
I think at this point even with the sparse feedback we have from developers (who knows how many have actually enacted on the awareness - conversely, how many more have but aren't talking about it), it's undeniable that the videos have already done good and caused some positive changes.
Yes, there's a vocal pushback from misogynists trying to defend themselves, but I think the resonance among developers has been pretty huge. While even one instance of improved design and raised awareness reflected in a game would be enough to make it all worthwhile, we've got several examples already.
edit: actually now that you mention it, one of them could definitely have been Druckmann
HarryHengst
Member
Your argument comes across as 'shit is hard, so please dont criticize it'. I hope you see why that is not really a solid argument.
And you are disappointed the discussion isnt further along when even the question whether that discussion should be had is being fought tooth and nail by reactionary groups like gamergate? Really?
freethought
Member
This guy man, this fucking guy. Here's his book if you would like to buy it. I think it's Atlas Shrugged but about porn instead of trains and it's apparently a 'scorching debut'. That's not a quote from a review by the way, it's written on the back of his book. Like it seriously is Atlas Jizzed. Instead of building some kind of super train, or super rails whatever Shrugged was about, the dude makes the world's best porn or some shit.
He also has this audiobook project on his youtube channel. It's about cats but I have no idea if it's any good. I think it's terrible but maybe it's just his awful reading.
Also, I think he took it down because of all the shit he was getting but his Nazi collaborator Davis Aurini has some footage from the upcoming 'Sarkeesian Effect' in which you can see Jordan Owen being a terrible interviewer and uncomfortable screen presence. Watch him be bored by his own interview! You can sort of hear him too. Eight grand a month.
Seriously, everything they say about Anita Sarkeesian could be 100% true and I would still think these guys are just phenomenal dicks. Fortunately they're so utterly fucking deluded that's not an issue.
edit: Just in case any of you are particularly masochistic here's the full rant. Like Cyan said, it's like an hour long and pretty much incoherent. Don't worry if you want more, you'll find plenty of hour+ rambling videos on his channel.
double edit: Or how about this 2 hour 40 minute response. It's not as bad as most of his stuff as he splices in plenty of footage of Women versus Tropes and it's always nice to watch a professional quality production with an engaging and likeable presenter.
I'm at a point now where I am through with any people whining about Sarkeesian. Her stuff is so bare-bones, so milquetoast, so 101, yet some people are still throwing a hissy-fit because they can't deal with a woman even questioning the status quo in the most mild and non-controversial manner. Because of their video games.
It's embarassing to watch people fall over each other to make misogynist fools out of themselves with almost no self-awareness and complete lack of empathy.
This is more a general comment on the reactions towards her, some of which are in this thread (and countless other instances).
It's embarassing to watch people fall over each other to make misogynist fools out of themselves with almost no self-awareness and complete lack of empathy.
This is more a general comment on the reactions towards her, some of which are in this thread (and countless other instances).
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Bingo. This is what I realized a while back. Her work isn't super compelling for me, but its also not for me, I'm already familiar with everything she's saying.
freethought
Member
You know how when you start talking politics with a cab driver your heart just starts sinking and your brain tries to crawl out of your head and you spend the next few days just breaking out in uncontrollable sobbing as you realise there really is no hope left for us as a species?
Not these guys!
Bonus for Aurini arriving home to find a bunch of cops blocking all the streets around his home and thinking Anita Sarkeesian had set the police on him. It was an electrical fire.
edit: If you do make it past more than five minutes of that garbage, at about 16-17 minutes in they start talking about going on the Daily Show. Seriously.
Not these guys!
Bonus for Aurini arriving home to find a bunch of cops blocking all the streets around his home and thinking Anita Sarkeesian had set the police on him. It was an electrical fire.
edit: If you do make it past more than five minutes of that garbage, at about 16-17 minutes in they start talking about going on the Daily Show. Seriously.
Prax
Member
^
I agree. Her stuff is very basic and I expected it to be a little bit less shallow, but there are a bunch of dummies out there that NEED basic (more than I expected, in fact!). And even then, they are crying and whining about it and misinterpreting it, but to go even more basic and sugar-coaty so no one "feels attacked" would feel even more condescending to many of us.
And for people raging about her missing the context or whatever subtlety you believe exists that balances out the "problematicness" of examples, I am pretty sure that she's trying to teach some to even recognize the trope in the first place. Some people are so blind, they don't even see what's in their face unless it's pointed out directly to them, and even then they will deny it exists and then start stumbling over their own feet when you add in "confounding variables".
I think her series will build on complexity, as it seems to be doing as we go on. She's made the meat of the basic arguments and can go into counterpoints in the next few videos, and then others who want to dive deeper (given that they are not afraid of the absolute stupidity and rabidness of dissenters that may follow) can build upon that.
So I'm really glad she's seeing the success she is in spite of all the harassment she's receiving, and I hope it galvanizes others to follow in her footsteps to continue examining videogames as a serious narrative and cultural medium.
I agree. Her stuff is very basic and I expected it to be a little bit less shallow, but there are a bunch of dummies out there that NEED basic (more than I expected, in fact!). And even then, they are crying and whining about it and misinterpreting it, but to go even more basic and sugar-coaty so no one "feels attacked" would feel even more condescending to many of us.
And for people raging about her missing the context or whatever subtlety you believe exists that balances out the "problematicness" of examples, I am pretty sure that she's trying to teach some to even recognize the trope in the first place. Some people are so blind, they don't even see what's in their face unless it's pointed out directly to them, and even then they will deny it exists and then start stumbling over their own feet when you add in "confounding variables".
I think her series will build on complexity, as it seems to be doing as we go on. She's made the meat of the basic arguments and can go into counterpoints in the next few videos, and then others who want to dive deeper (given that they are not afraid of the absolute stupidity and rabidness of dissenters that may follow) can build upon that.
So I'm really glad she's seeing the success she is in spite of all the harassment she's receiving, and I hope it galvanizes others to follow in her footsteps to continue examining videogames as a serious narrative and cultural medium.
McBradders
NeoGAF: my new HOME
Agreed.
bengraven
Member
No, it was picked apart because people fucking hate her for some reason.
Roran Stehl
Member
Druckmann explicitly stated in one of his keynotes that the first Tropes vs Women-videos were an inspiration for how he wrote TLOU.
That's another thing I don't get about the criticism towards Anita's argument. One of the most common ones is "She doesn't offer solutions! She's just hating!" However, the obvious solution is: hey, games writers, don't resort to these tired tropes. . And when they don't resort to those tropes they are forced to write a more novel narrative and use female characters in ways they often haven't before.
Developers who watch FF can make that conclusion on their own, she doesn't have to tell them.
If she'd come out with a list saying: "this is exactly how you should write instead of Trope X," I'm pretty sure she would be getting even more critique for limiting creative freedom.
She is not a developer, it's not her role to develop games. But highlighting shitty practices in games-writing makes developers more aware of pitfalls they didn't realize before (the Bioshock-example above is perfect). Anita should not be prescribing solutions, that's for the creative people of this industry to solve.
It is ridiculous when you present it as a straw man. No, women do not walk around in constant crippling fear, but they do experience more fear than men.
While the study below is merely one indicator of "fear", it goes a pretty long way to showing how men and women have different levels of fear in their daily lives. Couple this with the studies that show that women experience more harassment online, and you have a situation where their experience of threats lead to far more serious conclusions than those thrown around in a DOTA-game.
"In 93 of the 105 countries and areas surveyed, women are significantly less likely than men to say they feel safe walking alone at night in the city or area where they live. While this is not that surprising, the striking differences between men and women in some developed countries are. There is at least a 20-percentage-point difference between men and women in 21 countries, including Canada, France, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States."
One of the core but less discussed issue is that people confound her work with the Twitter persona of J.McIntosh (which is unsurprising as he is one of femfreq writer).
Her work is clearly a good base for reflection for the dev (I had great exchanges with an ex-Bioware around this idea), where he is way more in the classic anti-game/gamer arena (think of his stance on GTAV as a piece of misogynistic bullshit for all but gamers).
I think an open debate around her proposal away from the typical bias inducing/confirming social-media platforms would go a long way.
Her work should be seen as what it is: an example of good Knowledge Translation about gaming seen through a specific lens (feminism, she is clear about it). This is not an academic work, nor is it a proposal to ban/censor games.
I would go to say that we need more people like her, but approaching these questions with different lenses.
This is great. The observations starting around 5:25 go well into straight-up useful meta-commentary, for people who find Sarkeesian's presence troubling.
Keep in mind, people encounter information at different points from each other and from different starting points. There are plenty of times where actively trying to convince them faster would have an opposite effect. Most of the time, people need to work through their own realizations, if they're open to a new idea in the first place. If someone is filtering out an idea, raising the volume of your point will make it that much easier to rationalize why they shouldn't listen.
Gentleman Jack
Member
This is the first law of thermodynamics when it comes to Sarkeesian threads.
You will regret it when you reach the final episode and realize there aren't going to be any more
"In 93 of the 105 countries and areas surveyed, women are significantly less likely than men to say they feel safe walking alone at night in the city or area where they live. While this is not that surprising, the striking differences between men and women in some developed countries are. There is at least a 20-percentage-point difference between men and women in 21 countries, including Canada, France, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States."
Whether a man or women 'feels safe' to walk around at night has little to do with whether they are in fact safe or not. Men and women access risk differently it's just biology.
Men are much more likely to be victims of murder or attempted murder than women are. Given the choice, personally I would rather be sexually assaulted than killed.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll