because it’s marketed more to men than to women
you’re a misogynist.
i like the implication that men find it easier to emotionally connect to a dog than a woman and that that’s for…
Russian Lieutenant Tanya Pavelovna would like a word with you. If y’all gonna throw shit down at least get your facts straight so you’re not literally incorrect from the get go.
This kind of uninformed equality fear-mongering is exactly the type of behavior that dilutes the cause of third wave feminism entirely. You’re actively hurting your cause when you allow blatantly misrepresented or just plain wrong tumblr posts to worm their way out of the woodworks under the guise of feminist critique. How do you think you’re facilitating any sort of shift in gender equality with this?
This is wrong, and you are wrong. There is nothing in what we’ve seen in the single showing of the new Call of Duty that confirms or denies EITHER that dogs are playable or that women are not. You should feel bad that you jumped on this without doing any research whatsoever, and attempted at a grab for notes with something as blatantly sensationalist and tabloid as you chose to word it.
I’m not angry, I’m just annoyed that you took the path you did, because you’re hurting a genuine and legitimate rights movement that you no doubt care for a metric fuckton.
But this is not the way you do it.
Tanya Pavelovna was playable for two missions in a single game in a franchise with more than 10 games to its name. This is not “uninformed fear-mongering, it’s pointing out a massive problem with the representation of women in games. The fact that you think that a single character in a single game that came out over eight fucking years ago is somehow proving a point is compltely goddamn ridiculous.
It is proving a point.
I’m not sitting here denying you the right to talk about the inability of the mainstream gaming industry to properly integrate women into their videogames. This is a topic that should be discussed further.
I am however, sitting here and reminding you that if almost the entirety of the statement you’re attempting to push is either conjecture or outright lies, then no matter how just your cause, you’re not really taking a step in the right direction.
You tried to shut down a discussion by grasping at the straws of “THERE WAS A PLAYABLE CHARACTER ONCE” and “WE DON’T KNOW THE DOG IS PLAYABLE” and then tried to tell a bunch of women that they’re doing feminism wrong.
If you’re talking about basing the core of your argument on an untrue statement, then yes you are doing it wrong. I’m not grasping at straws at all here. Both segments of the original statement can- without question- be labelled as untrue.
I’m not shutting down your discussion, either. Your motivations and the core of the argument are both legitimate and justified. Absolutely we need better representation of female character in videogames and yes, the gaming industry needs to appeal less to the testosterone-laden bro-sculine man stereotype and begin to embrace that like other now-mainstream forms of media, there are many different demographics, genders and sexual identities that must be equally represented.
But don’t misrepresent or misquote what I say. Your excecution of this argument is wrong, not how you’re ‘doing feminism’. There’s a difference between this argument and feminism as a whole.
Also, paraphrasing my points back in all caps to me is a disheartening attempt to make my words seem less legitimate. I’m not your enemy here, though you seem to think that I am.
The core of the argument isn’t DOGS VS. WOMEN. The core of the argument is the representation of women in the media, especially games, and how monumentally fucked up it is that we see more attention paid to literal fucking animals than people who make up 50% of the goddamn population. This is something super simple that you are failing to grasp at all.
And yeah, you did try and shut down the discussion! You did so by attempting to divert attention away from the real issue and then by telling women how they’re doing feminism wrong, aka every discussion about feminism online when somebody like you shows up. It’s a super common tactic for shutting down discussions and it’s what should be called out here, not the validity of DOGS VS. WOMEN.
You say we need better representation of women in games? Then we need to call out the fact that animals get better representation than women. How we have a literal trained animal that people keep as pets in a helpful position in this game and how that’s far more likely in most people’s eyes than seeing a woman holding a gun.
That’s the discussion you are trying to shut down with your pedantic bullshit.