Support NeoGAF

[ReginaldXIV]

I wouldn't say South Park is extremely right wing, at least far as I can tell. It shares a similar view on minorities and their treatment, but I know South Park is also very derisive towards theocracy as well. I think the best way to put it is that a lot of right wing rhetoric looks like it belongs in a South Park episode.

South Park has never swayed in any direction and a lot of the time they go against the creators own political stance. They attack topics and people on both sides.

Taking a song from a clip that is out of context does not mean they're somehow Right-Wing or Extremists all of a sudden.

 

[marrec]

They've been referenced consistently throughout this thread on a first name basis, so I assumed there were some credentials beyond "target of gamergate" or whatever. Fuck me, right?

What? Why'd you get so offended? I expressed legitimate disbelief.

Do you have to be published in peer reviewed journals to be a critic? That's a question.

I don't' want to fuck you.

 

[MogCakes]

I don't think deriding a cheesecake game for being a cheesecake game is going to do anything except make certain people feel more self-righteous about themselves. Maybe if DOAX3 were about the girls actually being serious ninjas and they're dressed in thongs or some other similarly ridiculous attire meant for titillation with no agency in the plot or the character's personality, then criticism would be warranted. This game, however, knows exactly what it is and who it's targeting.

All that being said, those tweets are just cheap jabs that don't really serve any purpose. Play-Asia may want to look into the intern they've got staffed on that account.

 

[Ekai]

Oh no... I remember taking a political quiz that identified me as "egalitarian"... what if I was the demons the whole time????

Jokes aside, there are valid issues facing men with regards to sexuality, but the time to discuss them is not when the discussion is about problems facing women. And ironically, when I do talk about problems that men have with sexuality such as society instilling the unhealthy belief that everyone "deserves" sex for doing tasks and that due to the tabooing of healthy sexual content and near exclusive presentation of hypersexualized non-sexual situations leading them to think the only way to have sexual gratification is through subversion and disregarding consent, it's the MRA who hate it the most.

I wouldn't say South Park is extremely right wing, at least far as I can tell. It shares a similar view on minorities and their treatment, but I know South Park is also very derisive towards theocracy as well. I think the best way to put it is that a lot of right wing rhetoric looks like it belongs in a South Park episode.

The test results came back. NSQuote, you are NOT the skeletons.

That's been largely my experience with MRAs as well. They don't care to discuss issues that they will claim to be all about because as soon as the topic turns to what they want, they then use it to bash women or some other nonsense.

I would agree with that last sentence. They still come off as right-wing extremist to me because of that.

 

[Oersted]

I don't think deriding a cheesecake game for being a cheesecake game is going to do anything except make certain people feel more self-righteous about themselves. Maybe if DOAX3 were about the girls actually being serious ninjas and they're dressed in thongs or some other similarly ridiculous attire meant for titillation with no agency in the plot or the character's personality, then criticism would be warranted. This game, however, knows exactly what it is and who it's targeting.

All that being said, those tweets are just cheap jabs that don't really serve any purpose. Play-Asia may want to look into the intern they've got staffed on that account.

Criticism would be warranted. You just do it. But so far noone cared enough to do it/didn't review the game yet.

 

[AESplusF]

*scans*

yep. this whole post is bullshit

Yep. I'm shocked that people actually believe that South Park of all things has a right wing agenda.

 

[JoseLopez]

i mean

this has to do more with specific people being assholes than any sort of group though. the only "toxic feminism" that exists as a group are TERFs and they have like nothing to do with gaming at all.

Well their you go and also I have no clue what the guy marrec quoted was referring to so yeah. I just really don't like the idea that a group can't be criticized because of their ideals.

 

[maladroit]

What? Why'd you get so offended? I expressed legitimate disbelief.

Do you have to be published in peer reviewed journals to be a critic? That's a question.

I don't' want to fuck you.

Uh, no, anyone can be a critic, but considering they were constantly referenced on a first name basis throughout this thread I thought, after my own googling turned up nothing, someone could point me to some published works by whoever this person is, I was subsequently mocked and directed to their wikipedia entry instead. And now I'm offended? I guess I should stop trying to figure out what the hell is being talked about here and just cut my losses.

 

[Oersted]

Well their you go and also I have no clue what the guy marrec quoted was referring to so yeah. I just really don't like the idea that a group can't be criticized because of their ideals.

It is an idea you presented. I don't think it is an worthwhile idea.

 

[Sianos]

They've been referenced consistently throughout this thread on a first name basis, so I assumed there were some credentials beyond "target of gamergate" or whatever. Fuck me, right?

They make a lot of Internet videos about sexuality and media, gaining particular notoriety about when she published Tropes vs Women in Video Games.

Generally solid analyses, occasionally is a bit uncharitable towards intent, but I do think she has a lot of very valid points, especially about "women as rewards in video games". Notably, I think she is wrong about wanting to end internet anonymity and I think that will actually hurt feminists especially in areas like the middle east far more than it will hurt trolls who continue to spew vitriol even if with their real names attached.

Sorry for being uncharitable myself, I've legitimately only seen that line of thought used to discredit and I misinterpreted your intent.

 

[Deleted member 126221]

Uh, no, anyone can be a critic, but considering they were constantly referenced on a first name basis throughout this thread I thought, after my own googling turned up nothing, someone could point me to some published works by whoever this person is, I was subsequently mocked and directed to their wikipedia entry instead. And now I'm offended? I guess I should stop trying to figure out what the hell is being talked about here and just cut my losses.

You couldn't find anything on Google by typing "Anita Sarkeesian"?

 

[marrec]

Uh, no, anyone can be a critic, but considering they were constantly referenced on a first name basis throughout this thread I thought, after my own googling turned up nothing, someone could point me to some published works by whoever this person is, I was subsequently mocked and directed to their wikipedia entry instead. And now I'm offended? I guess I should stop trying to figure out what the hell is being talked about here and just cut my losses.

No no, you don't get to back off like that. Ya, you were offended you obtuse shit, you had a full name to google and turned up NOTHING?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Anita+Sarkeesian

Really?

There is a plethora of information on the first page about Anita Sarkeesian and you spout off some bullshit Gamegate talking point out of the ether because that's automatically where you take the idea of a nameless ungooglable critic is PEER REVIEWED JOURNALS.

I'm fucking sure. Why not just be fucking genuine?

 

[Oersted]

Uh, no, anyone can be a critic, but considering they were constantly referenced on a first name basis throughout this thread I thought, after my own googling turned up nothing, someone could point me to some published works by whoever this person is, I was subsequently mocked and directed to their wikipedia entry instead. And now I'm offended? I guess I should stop trying to figure out what the hell is being talked about here and just cut my losses.

Wiki does give you an idea how she became so big.

 

[OmahaG8]

They were pushing a right-wing narrative about how safe spaces deserve to be mocked when all they do is benefit minorities who deal with enough shit as is. Safe space is more than the moronic simplicity that SP and other righties online degrade it to and it's a term that has existed for some time. It's not out of nowhere all of the sudden or some fad just because the people mocking minorities have no clue what it is. I would much rather see attempts to understand and emphasize but South Park does not live in that kind of world and never did. Their aim is to make a quick "joke" at the expense of people that the creators have no desire to actually understand.

South Park constantly does this in regards to minorities. Be it the lgbt community (especially it's horrible treatment of trans-issues), racial concerns, etc. etc. the example is pretty much the whole series.

As for them being libertarians? That's rich. Matt and Trey could give two shits about liberal social issues. Whatever they can do to disenfranchise a minority and push media out there that encourages and supports harmful behaviors to them they do that and don't really seem to have any qualms about it. Plain and simple. That doesn't read as libertarian to me. But South Park is getting way off-topic and that show can go fuck itself with a thousand pitchforks for what it does to simplify the issues.

Why are we constantly putting labels on things? Stifling unpopular speech is hardly a progressive ideal ("SJW") and there's nothing "right wing" about pointing out that no one has a right not to be offended. Think beyond labels.

 

[Ekai]

*scans*

yep. this whole post is bullshit

Brilliant and nuanced rebuttal there. Sorry you dislike that I criticize the laziness of South Park's writing and how it just takes a jab at whatever minority they want to 'talk' about because they don't actually care to understand the issues they're discussing?

South Park has never swayed in any direction and a lot of the time they go against the creators own political stance. They attack topics and people on both sides.

Taking a song from a clip that is out of context does not mean they're somehow Right-Wing or Extremists all of a sudden.

I'm not just talking about the song. I'm talking about the show as a whole. It has a pretty sordid history of attacking minorities and pushing harmful rhetoric that is eaten up by certain subsets of the population.

That being said, it has little to do with this current topic outside of me responding to other's using SPs safe spaces nonsense in response to this matter. If you guys want to debate with me about the right-wing extremism of South Park there's Off-topic for that. Or hound me in a PM if you want. I already said my piece on the matter. I made one comment, didn't expect that that would drag people out of the woodwork to change the context of a bunch of the posts when it didn't before when these SP posts were made. I won't make another post on this matter in this topic.

Why are we constantly putting labels on things? Stifling unpopular speech is hardly a progressive ideal ("SJW") and there's nothing "right wing" about pointing out that no one has a right not to be offended. Think beyond labels.

Hate-filled rhetoric and a lack of attempting to understand or emphasize with certain minorities is something that plagues current right-wing policy, news-media, forums, etc. I wish that wasn't the case but it is unfortunately so. And it was hardly about "pointing out that you don't have the right to be not offended", that was their purposeful lack of understanding what a safe-space even is. They then used this lack of understanding to mock people for it. Essentially SP made up a phantom of what a Safe Space is, that already existed in the minds of less than emphatic people online, and just ran with it. The "label" exists because it aptly sums up the matter. Their content and behavior is in line with right-wing rhetoric quite often. That's the plain and simple way of putting it.

 

[Crash Station]

They were pushing a right-wing narrative about how safe spaces deserve to be mocked when all they do is benefit minorities who deal with enough shit as is. Safe space is more than the moronic simplicity that SP and other righties online degrade it to and it's a term that has existed for some time. It's not out of nowhere all of the sudden or some fad just because the people mocking minorities have no clue what it is. I would much rather see attempts to understand and emphasize but South Park does not live in that kind of world and never did. Their aim is to make a quick "joke" at the expense of people that the creators have no desire to actually understand.

South Park constantly does this in regards to minorities. Be it the lgbt community (especially it's horrible treatment of trans-issues), racial concerns, etc. etc. the example is pretty much the whole series.

As for them being libertarians? That's rich. Matt and Trey could give two shits about liberal social issues. Whatever they can do to disenfranchise a minority and push media out there that encourages and supports harmful behaviors to them they do that and don't really seem to have any qualms about it. Plain and simple. That doesn't read as libertarian to me. But South Park is getting way off-topic and that show can go fuck itself with a thousand pitchforks for what it does to simplify the issues.

What? South Park has an extremely positive view of the LGBT community. Yes, the dolphin episode wasn't very sensitive, but a decade has passed since then and people better understand trans-issues in general. The Lorde episode from last year was very supportive and concluded the bathroom issue with a generally presented as liberal solution.

The only recent point that could be made is Caitlyn Jenner, but they aren't making fun of transgender people there, they're making fun of Caitlyn Jenner.

And the whole safe space thing wasn't about pushing already down minorities, it was mocking people that go crazy over incredibly minor problems. Parker and Stone aren't mocking stuff like the Starbucks safe space for victims of anti-LGBT crimes, they're mocking the people that have it a thousand times better than that yet still show a comparatively disproportionate display of being offended. Hell, there wasn't a single minority in the safe space song, just like there's not a single minority in the PC frat.

 

[marrec]

I should just go back to grinding up cloves for this fucking pumpkin pie instead of letting some intentionally obtuse fuck get me riled up.

Maladroit, I apologize for getting heated, if you genuinely couldn't google "Anita Sarkeesian" then I'm sorry. I can help you if you need help.

 

[Crossing Eden]

Uh, no, anyone can be a critic, but considering they were constantly referenced on a first name basis throughout this thread I thought, after my own googling turned up nothing, someone could point me to some published works by whoever this person is, I was subsequently mocked and directed to their wikipedia entry instead. And now I'm offended? I guess I should stop trying to figure out what the hell is being talked about here and just cut my losses.

I find it incredibly hard to believe that you couldn't find an absolute fuckton of information on Anita with a google search. You really expect people to believe that?

 

[ShockingAlberto]

"How 7 People in the West Run Asian Videogames"

I thought we established I run the Japanese game industry when I got Mega Man and Cloud in Smash Bros. and Platinum started working on a new Nier.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Uh, no, anyone can be a critic, but considering they were constantly referenced on a first name basis throughout this thread I thought, after my own googling turned up nothing, someone could point me to some published works by whoever this person is, I was subsequently mocked and directed to their wikipedia entry instead. And now I'm offended? I guess I should stop trying to figure out what the hell is being talked about here and just cut my losses.

If you're actually being serious, Anita Sarkeesian is the creator of the Tropes vs. Women series that sought to highlight examples of tropes being used in video games that did a disservice portrayals of women in the gaming. It first became sort of a big deal years ago (May - June of 2012), so this predates the events of #GamerGate. The series garnered some attention when it initially set a $6,000 goal to help fund a video series, and later -- after highlighting abuse and ridicule she was receiving on the internet from some sites for attempting to make this series -- she proceeded to crush that goal and raise about $160,000.

To put it succinctly, regardless of where you stand -- be it for her endeavor or against it -- she's at the very least one of the most prominent figureheads of the modern feminist push in gaming. But the main body of her work in this medium is just a series of YouTube videos that tackle different tropes that affect female gaming characters.

 

[Sianos]

South Park has never swayed in any direction and a lot of the time they go against the creators own political stance. They attack topics and people on both sides.

Taking a song from a clip that is out of context does not mean they're somehow Right-Wing or Extremists all of a sudden.

No, my point is more that you could slip a lot of far right rhetoric or the rhetoric of the current frontrunners into the intentionally inflammatory and unrealistic South Park and it wouldn't be out of place.

Ben Carson claiming to threaten his mother with a hammer then getting upset when the media doesn't believe him and Trump calling for Mexico to pay and build a giant wall sound more like South Park episodes than reality.

The test results came back. NSQuote, you are NOT the skeletons.

That's been largely my experience with MRAs as well. They don't care to discuss issues that they will claim to be all about because as soon as the topic turns to what they want, they then use it to bash women or some other nonsense.

I would agree with that last sentence. They still come off as right-wing extremist to me because of that.

I suppose being really thin puts me at an enhanced risk of becoming a skeleton: I'll make sure to keep vigilant.

It really is a shame, because there are legitimate issues that men face sexually and psychological. They are just usually based in the patriarchal archetypes of society and not the fault of women, so supposed "MRA's" don't want to talk about it.

 

[Oersted]

Folks, this thread isn't really about South Park.

 

[JoseLopez]

It is an idea you presented. I don't think it is an worthwhile idea.

? One guy gave criticism (not very good one but still) then the other dude actually implied said group has done no wrong. Again I'm a feminist and I support anything against gamergate idiots but criticism is very important and some of you get very defensive on either side.

See, people keep saying this, and yet I haven't seen a single case of "toxic feminism" reported from any non-GG source. Makes you think.

Dude stop, like are you actually saying theirs never been a case of a feminist saying something dumb.

 

[Sianos]

Folks, this thread isn't really about South Park.

True, I've diverged a bit too much now. My apologies.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

No no, you don't get to back off like that. Ya, you were offended you obtuse shit, you had a full name to google and turned up NOTHING?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Anita+Sarkeesian

Really?

There is a plethora of information on the first page about Anita Sarkeesian and you spout off some bullshit Gamegate talking point out of the ether because that's automatically where you take the idea of a nameless ungooglable critic is PEER REVIEWED JOURNALS.

I'm fucking sure. Why not just be fucking genuine?

Wow... maybe you need to take a break...

I think he brought up a point I had not thought of before. A peer reviewed scholarly article could be a very useful thing to read (by anyone).

 

[Crash Station]

I am indeed.

Neat, I never knew this.

 

[Oersted]

? One guy gave criticism (not very good one but still) then the other dude actually implied said group has done no wrong. Again I'm a feminist and I support anything against gamergate idiots but criticism is very important and some of you get very defensive on either side.

Dude stop, like are you actually saying theirs never been a case of a feminist saying something dumb.

Either side is being a feminist or being against feminism. One can be wrong, the other is wrong.

You are welcome.

Wow... maybe you need to take a break...

I think he brought up a point I had not thought of before. A peer reviewed scholarly article could be a very useful thing to read (by anyone).

Read one.

 

[AESplusF]

Well the thread isn't really about Anita Sarkisian either, although it's more relevant I suppose.

 

[maladroit]

No no, you don't get to back off like that. Ya, you were offended you obtuse shit, you had a full name to google and turned up NOTHING?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Anita+Sarkeesian

Really?

There is a plethora of information on the first page about Anita Sarkeesian and you spout off some bullshit Gamegate talking point out of the ether because that's automatically where you take the idea of a nameless ungooglable critic is PEER REVIEWED JOURNALS.

I'm fucking sure. Why not just be fucking genuine?

The entire first page is nothing but links to a twitter account, her wikipedia entry, and a bunch of news articles about her being harassed and shit. I was specifically asking for links to her published works and the only thing that comes close to it is what I think is her youtube account?

Why is this an argument or debate and why are you being so hostile? She's a critic that is apparently well known by the posters here, I wished to be informed, I asked for links to her works beyond youtube videos, instead of providing anything I get your bizarre rantings that I literally do not even understand. Am I unknowingly pushing a button or what the fuck?

I'm a married person with a wife, kids, a career, and other responsibilities. Sorry for not being in the loop about whatever the fuck you're so angry about. I'm also sorry for trying to be more informed. I won't make that mistake again, I guess.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Why is this an argument or debate and why are you being so hostile? She's a critic that is apparently well known by the posters here, I wished to be informed, I asked for links to her works beyond youtube videos

Well, her body of work in the field pretty much is just the YouTube video series. There's not really much else to know about her professional credentials. And I'm not saying this to be adversarial. I just honestly don't know why her thesis would be germane to the conversation.

 

[JoseLopez]

Either side is being a feminist or being against feminism. One can be wrong, the other is wrong.

You are welcome.



Read one.

What? I can't be a feminist and criticize the comments of my peers? The way you look at things is so damn black and white like geez dude have you heard of constructive criticism.

 

[AESplusF]

The entire first page is nothing but links to a twitter account, her wikipedia entry, and a bunch of news articles about her being harassed and shit. I was specifically asking for links to her published works and the only thing that comes close to it is what I think is her youtube account?

Why is this an argument or debate and why are you being so hostile? She's a critic that is apparently well known by the posters here, I wished to be informed, I asked for links to her works beyond youtube videos, instead of providing anything I get your bizarre rantings that I literally do not even understand. Am I unknowingly pushing a button or what the fuck?

I'm a married person with a wife, kids, a career, and other responsibilities. Sorry for not being in the loop about whatever the fuck you're so angry about. I'm also sorry for trying to be more informed. I won't make that mistake again, I guess.

That kind of sensitivity is exactly what SP is making fun of, he just thinks you're trying to be dense on purpose don't take it persoanlly.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

Read one.

Right, I just said it would be helpful. Do you have anything of substance to add or care to elaborate on your comment?

 

[maladroit]

Well, her body of work in the field pretty much is just the YouTube video series. There's not really much else to know about her professional credentials. And I'm not saying this to be adversarial. I just honestly don't know why her thesis would be germane to the conversation.

And this is a completely fine response to my initial question, thanks for illuminating as opposed to insulting.

 

[ThatsMytrunks]

This thread + expiring points = I bought DoA X3 from CDJapan.

 

[Ekai]

Folks, this thread isn't really about South Park.

My apologies as well.

 

[Oersted]

The entire first page is nothing but links to a twitter account, her wikipedia entry, and a bunch of news articles about her being harassed and shit. I was specifically asking for links to her published works and the only thing that comes close to it is what I think is her youtube account?

Why is this an argument or debate and why are you being so hostile? She's a critic that is apparently well known by the posters here, I wished to be informed, I asked for links to her works beyond youtube videos, instead of providing anything I get your bizarre rantings that I literally do not even understand. Am I unknowingly pushing a button or what the fuck?

I'm a married person with a wife, kids, a career, and other responsibilities. Sorry for not being in the loop about whatever the fuck you're so angry about. I'm also sorry for trying to be more informed. I won't make that mistake again, I guess.

Who is Anita Sarkeesian is often used by posters ,who are against Sarkeesian, to say in a backhanded manner her opinion doesn't matter, in an attempt to delegitimize her.Here on NeoGAF, we had a huge amount of threads, with a huge amount of replies, covering her work. Her works are and were a enourmous talking point in the gaming industry, on boards and social networks. All of that can people make believe you are not genuine with your question.

And no matter if those users are right, there is indeed enough to read about her.

What? I can't be a feminist and criticize the comments of my peers? The way you look at things is so damn black and white like geez dude have you heard of constructive criticism.

I wrote feminists can be wrong. Antifeminists are wrong. I did not wrote feminists can't be critized.

 

[USC-fan]

really hope this isnt the case with this game not coming over here. Seem completely silly to me.

This game wasnt even on my radar but will keep track of it now.

 

[Oersted]

really hope this isnt the case with this game not coming over here. Seem completely silly to me.

This game wasnt even on my radar but will keep track of it now.

You fell for a publicity stunt.

 

[JoseLopez]

Who is Anita Sarkeesian is often used by posters ,who are against Sarkeesian, to say in a backhanded manner her opinion doesn't matter, in an attempt to delegitimize her.Here on NeoGAF, we had a huge amount of threads, with a huge amount of replies, covering her work. Her works are and were a enourmous talking point in the gaming industry, on boards and social networks. All of that can people make believe you are not genuine with your question.

And no matter if those users are right, there is indeed enough to read about her.



I wrote feminists can be wrong. Antifeminists are wrong. I did not wrote feminists can't be critized.

Ok yeah I see what you wrote I agree sorry

 

[USC-fan]

You fell for a publicity stunt.

i read Patrick Klepek article on this. Is there something new?

 

[Thalnos]

I had no idea there was even an english language asian version until this entire shitstorm. Thanks I guess, lol

 

[philz]

You fell for a publicity stunt.

Hey, I get that this is a subject that a lot of people are passionate about, but I don't see how you get to this conclusion.

 

[Wallach]

Hey, I get that this is a subject that a lot of people are passionate about but I don't see how you get to this conclusion.

I think it would be pretty on the nose to call what Play-Asia posted a publicity stunt, not Tecmo-Koei's decision. That's probably what Oersted is referring to.

 

[philz]

I think it would be pretty on the nose to call what Play-Asia posted a publicity stunt, not Tecmo-Koei's decision. That's probably what Oersted is referring to.

Fair enough.

 

[Oersted]

That's not what you wrote

I wrote

"Either side is being a feminist or being against feminism. One can be wrong, the other is wrong.

You are welcome."

Due to your post,which suggested an error in communication, I specified what I said.

Fakeedit:

Its fine^^

Hey, I get that this is a subject that a lot of people are passionate about, but I don't see how you get to this conclusion.

I think it would be pretty on the nose to call what Play-Asia posted a publicity stunt, not Tecmo-Koei's decision. That's probably what Oersted is referring to.

Yep. My communication skills are apparently very lacking right now.

 

[FyreWulff]

Hey, I get that this is a subject that a lot of people are passionate about, but I don't see how you get to this conclusion.

When a game fails to even get a single order after it was offered to multiple US retailers, sounds more to me that Lik Sang wants some "controversy" to clear out incoming inventory.

Tecmo never had plans to bring it to the West.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

I think it would be pretty on the nose to call what Play-Asia posted a publicity stunt, not Tecmo-Koei's decision. That's probably what Oersted is referring to.

I am pretty sure it was their (TK's) decision to not release because of fear of backlash. This was explained over an obscure facebook post like a week or two ago. It wasn't even a news story til a week after. I think play-asia's tweet was a move to capitalize on the attention the story was already getting.

 

[philz]

Tecmo never had plans to bring it to the West.

I hate when people call for sources in these types of discussions but do we have something more authoritative than the official Facebook post on this?

 

[philz]

Yep. My communication skills are apparently very lacking right now.

Could be mine as well.