>>724694292
But that's not what's happening here? I'm not denying that leftists have said all of these things about individual gamers in the past. Usually tho, they have been right, lmao.
But again: what this is about, is that in OPs Pic, a feminist is talking about sexism in video games, and instead of engaging with that point at all, OP has strawmanned this argument down to: "demonizing female characters that have sex appeal", which is not the argument the person is making.
If you were in school and had to write an essay rebutting the Idea of video game sexism, and all you addressed was demonization of sex appeal, you'd get an F for missing the topic entirely.
>>724694417
But you're doing it again. You are not listening. You are taking 12 steps ahead, to the most extreme theoretically possible result for women, based on negative depictions of women in vidya.
Not to mention that:
>doesn't have any effect on men whatsoever.
Do you know that? Are there studies on that, that you can cite? Or did you just assume this to be true, because *you* FEEL like it doesn't have an effect on YOU, and therefore it probably doesn't have an effect on anyone? How would you know? Have you tested it vs yourself living your entire life never being exposed to this?
And what about women? How do you know that if a majority of female characters are reduced to nothing but their bodies in media, that girls and women won't be affected? For instance that they might develop body image issues, where they feel like if they can't live up to these fictional beauty standards, they are unworthy? Or that maybe they have little to no worth besides their body?
Do you have researched this? Have you read the studies? Do you know the control groups? Or do you just "have a feeling" that you're right anyway, and assumed that's the universal truth?
And I don't actually want you to answer these questions here. Because that would be actually doing feminism, and fuck that, I'm not in the mood.
