That Feminist Gamer Girl Did a Thing (DERAILED)

[jkid101094]

It further drives home the point that arguing with you is just a waste of time.

[Elija2]

It further drives home the point that arguing with you is just a waste of time.

Arguing? Since when have you been making arguments? All you've done is sling insults at me.

[jkid101094]

I haven't for the aforementioned reason.

No matter what I say you aren't going to listen and you're just going to keep grasping at straws and irrational opinions until I give up.

[Hakudamashi]

After 13 mainline Mario games where Peach is kidnapped, you'd think she'd learn to stick up for herself.

I'd more think she'd better train her Toads, what do those fucks even do?

And Peach totally can fight against big strong monsters. She does so twice in both Super Mario Bros 2 and Super Mario 3D World.

Super Mario Bros. 2 was a dream, and Mario 3D World is the latest one, you'll have an argument if she gets kidnapped again.
But, then again, Peach wasn't Bowser's objective this time, the Sprixies were(all female oh noes). And Peach fought back with Mario, Luigi, and some random Toad.

It's not that Zelda is weaker than Ganon, it's that time and time again she's made weak and helpless when she can clearly be a stronger character (Sheik, Tetra).

First of all, each Zelda is a different character, Sheik and Tetra were Zeldas raised in dire times, every other Zelda was raised in times of peace.
Secondly, she's not weak, when she's not a skilled magician, or shooting light arrows, she's very serious about her duty or ruling her kingdom, strength is not only how well you fight in battle.

So they're able to help the hero but they can never help themselves, even when they're the ones being kidnapped? Of course, only the male hero can save them. That's not sexist.

They're KIDNAPPED, by big, scary, monstrocities, it's not like they got slapped on the wrist and told to stay in their room. They are guarded, and often times kept captive in a place where even if they escape, they'd have nowhere to go. So they at least find ways to help out the person who CAN do something about it.
And what's wrong if the hero is a male?
Link is chosen by the goddess, he bears the Triforce of Courage and wields the blade of evil's bane, despite all the Hylians of the land, only he can stop Ganon. What does his gender matter? Him being a man does not negate his accomplishments
And Mario, other than being the only one in the Kingdom that isn't a lazy fuck, he always risk life and limb and rise to every obstacle to rescue this person that clearly means alot. Does that mean nothing just cause he's a man?

Their cases are not sexist, if you swap the genders around nothing would change.

What kind of authority figure is Peach? She's a princess, sure, but what does that entail? In the games all she ever does is get kidnapped. We never see what she does for her kingdom. She has no character, she's treated as nothing but an object that must be rescued.

If you mean the mainline games, then they barely have story in the first place. You're just given a reason to play the game, and what better reason than to "Save your woman"? I know if my girlfriend were kidnapped I would spring to action no matter what. It's just a cheap plot for the game to take place, nothing to think hard about.

In the RPGs however, we all know that Peach is a very pleasant and caring person that all her citizens adore and her very presence makes them calm.
If you wanna be a cynic and go with the angle "So she's just a trophy?", then be my guest, all I know is that she loves her citizens, and they love her, that's all I need to know.

Zelda is a bit better in that regard, but that doesn't change the fact that she is made helpless in every game she appears in at least once, often throughout the majority of the game. Being a vague authority figure doesn't automatically make them a strong character.

Being able to swing a sword doesn't make you a strong character either.

When did she say that?

I dun know, I just said I haven't seen her vid in ages :U

[Elija2]

I haven't for the aforementioned reason.

No matter what I say you aren't going to listen and you're just going to keep grasping at straws and irrational opinions until I give up.

What the hell are you talking about? I've been listening to what Haku and Kyo are saying because even though we disagree they're at least coming up with counter-arguments. Literally all you've done in this thread is shit on me without even once attempting to attack my points. You accused me of being brainwashed just because I'm defending Anita, but somehow I'm the irrational one? Or are you the one grasping at straws because you don't have an actual counter-argument?

[jkid101094]

What the hell are you talking about? I've been listening to what Haku and Kyo are saying because even though we disagree they're at least coming up with counter-arguments. Literally all you've done in this thread is shit on me without even once attempting to attack my points. You accused me of being brainwashed just because I'm defending Anita, but somehow I'm the irrational one? Or are you the one grasping at straws because you don't have an actual counter-argument?

If you identify with SJWs then I automatically disrespect you. It's like going up to a black guy and telling him you're a member of the KKK. No one involved wants that shit.

Everyone bitches a fit when Mario has to save Peach but when Shantae has to go out and rescue her useless ass grandfather from a female villain no one bats an eyelash. This isn't a problem because it's wrong, it's a problem because people make it one.

They're modern video games. They don't need to use classic stereotypes.

Why does this even matter at all to anyone? Mario and Zelda have a classic, "Save the princess!" storyline, but what exactly about that ticks people off? That it's demeaning to women? Should we remove the Goombas as well because it demeans their race to be the easiest enemy in the game? I could make the same argument in reverse and say that it demeans men that Mario has to go risking his life to save a princess with no compensation. The man plows through eight worlds at minimum, defeats hordes of monsters and all he gets in return is a kiss in a cake? If this were real life Mario would have two mansions and half a kingdom to his name by now. It demeans men to depict them slaving away day in and day out for no reward while Peach gets to chill out between two castles every adventure and wait.

"But wait, jkid! What we find offensive is that Peach is powerless and..."

So what you're saying is that if the roles were reversed you'd be fine with it? Why didn't I think of that!? Equality at it's finest!

Oh, but you want Mario to save a man, right? How about Luigi? No, that's offensive to little brothers. Toad? No, that depicts hard-working salary men as weak and helpless.

How about we just accept that the person who is weak and powerless just happens to be a woman? There are many more features of her that make her desirable than the fact that she's a girl. She's royalty. She's rich. She has land Bowser probably wants. She has a super genius, a one man army, thousands of soldiers and an entire kingdom at her disposal that only needs her word to get working. But nah, if we focused on any of those facts we'd have nothing to bitch about.

But oh no! Bowser is confirmed to be in love with the princess! That makes her a sexual object!

News flash, guys. I was yankin' my wank to Peach long before I play Super Paper Mario. I can't help that she's damn near perfect.

So I guess what I'm getting at, for a recap, is that I don't see what your problem is. You say it's sexist but...is it really? There are plenty of hard working women in the mushroom kingdom: Rosalina, Todette, Wendy, Vivian, Gombella, Daisy (on occasion), Birdo, ect. How can you call a series sexist because one portion of it portrays a helpless woman? If Peach was a man and Mario and Bowser were women would you still call it sexist? I think not.

[Hakudamashi]

Birdo's a girl?

[jkid101094]

Yes, according to modern day Nintendo.

[Hakudamashi]

I am actually dissapoint.

[Elija2]

Super Mario Bros. 2 was a dream, and Mario 3D World is the latest one, you'll have an argument if she gets kidnapped again.

My argument is that Peach can fend for herself. 3D World proves this.

First of all, each Zelda is a different character, Sheik and Tetra were Zeldas raised in dire times, every other Zelda was raised in times of peace.
Secondly, she's not weak, when she's not a skilled magician, or shooting light arrows, she's very serious about her duty or ruling her kingdom, strength is not only how well you fight in battle.

Yes, every Zelda is different, so then why do they all have to be helpless damsels?

No, she's not weak, but then why is she getting kidnapped in almost every game? What's the point of her being this supposedly awesome character when she spends the majority of the game helplessly locked away?

They're KIDNAPPED, by big, scary, monstrocities, it's not like they got slapped on the wrist and told to stay in their room. They are guarded, and often times kept captive in a place where even if they escape, they'd have nowhere to go. So they at least find ways to help out the person who CAN do something about it.

So the princess is heavily guarded at all times (because that just makes sense), but the front door to the big scary monster's lair is just left open so that any hero can come wandering in to save the princess. How convenient to make it so that the princess is forced to be completely helpless while the hero has the only means to save the day.

If you mean the mainline games, then they barely have story in the first place. You're just given a reason to play the game, and what better reason than to "Save your woman"? I know if my girlfriend were kidnapped I would spring to action no matter what. It's just a cheap plot for the game to take place, nothing to think hard about.

Yes, it's cheap and sexist.

Being able to swing a sword doesn't make you a strong character either.

No but your reason for not being able to swing a sword should be better than "I need to be helpless so that somebody else can save me."

If you identify with SJWs then I automatically disrespect you. It's like going up to a black guy and telling him you're a member of the KKK. No one involved wants that shit.

Are you fucking serious? You're comparing me to a group that preaches hate when I've been doing the exact opposite? I've been calling for less sexism in games and somehow that makes me a bad guy? How demented are you?

Why does this even matter at all to anyone? Mario and Zelda have a classic, "Save the princess!" storyline, but what exactly about that ticks people off? That it's demeaning to women? Should we remove the Goombas as well because it demeans their race to be the easiest enemy in the game? I could make the same argument in reverse and say that it demeans men that Mario has to go risking his life to save a princess with no compensation. The man plows through eight worlds at minimum, defeats hordes of monsters and all he gets in return is a kiss in a cake? If this were real life Mario would have two mansions and half a kingdom to his name by now. It demeans men to depict them slaving away day in and day out for no reward while Peach gets to chill out between two castles every adventure and wait.

Yeah, I'm sure being the capable hero and going on fun adventures must really suck for Mario. Who would want to be him?

"But wait, jkid! What we find offensive is that Peach is powerless and..."

So what you're saying is that if the roles were reversed you'd be fine with it? Why didn't I think of that!? Equality at it's finest!

Oh, but you want Mario to save a man, right? How about Luigi? No, that's offensive to little brothers. Toad? No, that depicts hard-working salary men as weak and helpless.

Well for one it wouldn't be reinforcing an over-used stereotype. It wouldn't be as big of a deal if the roles were reversed because a male damsel in distress isn't a widely-used stereotype. If anything, people would see it as a joke. "Haha, I get it, it's the man getting kidnapped this time."

How about we just accept that the person who is weak and powerless just happens to be a woman? There are many more features of her that make her desirable than the fact that she's a girl. She's royalty. She's rich. She has land Bowser probably wants. She has a super genius, a one man army, thousands of soldiers and an entire kingdom at her disposal that only needs her word to get working. But nah, if we focused on any of those facts we'd have nothing to bitch about.

When the person who is weak and powerless "just happens to be a woman" 99% of the time, then we have a problem. Peach having her own kingdom doesn't change anything. If anything it just makes her more of a generic princess.

But oh no! Bowser is confirmed to be in love with the princess! That makes her a sexual object!

News flash, guys. I was yankin' my wank to Peach long before I play Super Paper Mario. I can't help that she's damn near perfect.

I'm not even gonna comment on this.

So I guess what I'm getting at, for a recap, is that I don't see what your problem is. You say it's sexist but...is it really? There are plenty of hard working women in the mushroom kingdom: Rosalina, Todette, Wendy, Vivian, Gombella, Daisy (on occasion), Birdo, ect. How can you call a series sexist because one portion of it portrays a helpless woman? If Peach was a man and Mario and Bowser were women would you still call it sexist? I think not.

Did I say that the Mario franchise is sexist? No, I'm saying that it uses many sexist tropes. The problem is that by constantly reusing these tropes, they're reinforcing and normalizing these sexist views towards women.

[Hakudamashi]

My argument is that Peach can fend for herself. 3D World proves this.

Alot of good being able to fend for yourself will do once the baddie takes the initiative to kidnap you. Remove you from the equation, n' stuff.

Yes, every Zelda is different, so then why do they all have to be helpless damsels?

They aren't just "helpless damsels", fucking, Ganon, Vaati, Ghrirahim, Yuga, either overwhelm their army or use cunning tricks to subdue them. It is not a matter of "oh, the woman was captured", a fucking madman is trying to rule the world. And in Zelda games, except Skyward Sword, Link's quest is to save Hyrule, and all the people, from the great evil.
Do you want me to apologise that Link just so happens to be a man?

No, she's not weak, but then why is she getting kidnapped in almost every game? What's the point of her being this supposedly awesome character when she spends the majority of the game helplessly locked away?

I put more emphasis on the Villain. By having Zelda being a good ruler, it better sets up the villain who devised a plan, or had the power to overthrow her and take over her kingdom, and as to why the prophesied hero is needed to defeat him.
In other words. I don't see Zelda being "helpless", I see Zelda villains are serious business.

So the princess is heavily guarded at all times (because that just makes sense), but the front door to the big scary monster's lair is just left open so that any hero can come wandering in to save the princess. How convenient to make it so that the princess is forced to be completely helpless while the hero has the only means to save the day.

In the case of Mario, it's not "convenient", that's just who Mario is. He gets off his ass, and journeys across all manners of evil just to get to the castle, the castle to which Bowser lets him in, cause his ego is soo goddamn large that he always believes "this time will be the time I end you."
Also, did you forget that in 3D Land, Bowser taunted Mario by sending him pictures of him torturing Peach while she's captive? Yeah, he even let her out of her cage just to have her chased down by his minions. Bowser, despite the jovial tone of the Mario franchise, isn't someone can just fuck with, he's kind of a dick.
In the case of Zelda. In almost all cases, she's straight up under petrification, anyone is fucked under that circumstance. And secondly, the door is NEVER just "left open", Link's gotta go through hell and back just to get the goddamn door open, and even then, he has one last trial to go through.

Yes, it's cheap and sexist.

It's not sexist, how is that sexist? Please explain sexist to me.
I fail to see how wanting to save a woman is sexist. Should I leave her to die? Should I never help a female out? Should I always just leave a woman to fend for herself? I don't understand.

No but your reason for not being able to swing a sword should be better than "I need to be helpless so that somebody else can save me."

Her reason for not swinging as sword is cause she wasn't trained to swing a sword, that's what the soldiers are for 

Yeah, I'm sure being the capable hero and going on fun adventures must really suck for Mario. Who would want to be him?

I wouldn't...

[Elija2]

Alot of good being able to fend for yourself will do once the baddie takes the initiative to kidnap you. Remove you from the equation, n' stuff.

Yeah, because it's impossible to escape when you've got incompetent fools like Bowser keeping you. Peach has no problem going through 8 worlds of danger in 3D World, but she can't help herself when she's trapped by Bowser.

And yet every time the male hero is captured there's always a method of escape that you go through. You never wait for someone to come get you, you're always able to save yourself.

They aren't just "helpless damsels", fucking, Ganon, Vaati, Ghrirahim, Yuga, either overwhelm their army or use cunning tricks to subdue them. It is not a matter of "oh, the woman was captured", a fucking madman is trying to rule the world. And in Zelda games, except Skyward Sword, Link's quest is to save Hyrule, and all the people, from the great evil.
Do you want me to apologise that Link just so happens to be a man?

Link's reason for saving the world doesn't always have to be "because the princess was captured." Why must that always be his goal? Yeah, I know why, Zelda contains a piece of the Triforce and Ganon has to kidnap her to get to it. But because of this, the same stereotypical story gets repeated every game. Would it kill them to be a bit more original?

I put more emphasis on the Villain. By having Zelda being a good ruler, it better sets up the villain who devised a plan, or had the power to overthrow her and take over her kingdom, and as to why the prophesied hero is needed to defeat him.
In other words. I don't see Zelda being "helpless", I see Zelda villains are serious business.

And Zelda isn't also serious business? She's the one who rules her own kingdom and shit.

In the case of Mario, it's not "convenient", that's just who Mario is. He gets off his ass, and journeys across all manners of evil just to get to the castle, the castle to which Bowser lets him in, cause his ego is soo goddamn large that he always believes "this time will be the time I end you."
Also, did you forget that in 3D Land, Bowser taunted Mario by sending him pictures of him torturing Peach while she's captive? Yeah, he even let her out of her cage just to have her chased down by his minions. Bowser, despite the jovial tone of the Mario franchise, isn't someone can just fuck with, he's kind of a dick.
In the case of Zelda. In almost all cases, she's straight up under petrification, anyone is fucked under that circumstance. And secondly, the door is NEVER just "left open", Link's gotta go through hell and back just to get the goddamn door open, and even then, he has one last trial to go through.

It is convenient. We're led to believe that Bowser keeps Peach super-secure so that she can't escape but that Mario is able to just waltz in. Bowser having a big ego is a dumb excuse. If that were the case then he would have likely let Peach roam free as well. And while being let out of her cage in 3D Land Peach didn't even attempt to escape?

Zelda being put under petrification is another dumb excuse. If it's so easy to capture people through petrification, why wouldn't Ganon also capture Link this way? That would be the logical thing to do. But no, of course the game is written so that Zelda is captured with no means of escaping while Link is free to go after her.

I fail to see how wanting to save a woman is sexist. Should I leave her to die? Should I never help a female out? Should I always just leave a woman to fend for herself? I don't understand.

It's not that you're saving a woman, it's that the woman is always incapable of saving herself and she is ultimately just used as a lazy plot device. It never needs to be a woman that's stolen, it could just as easily be some object like Shine Sprites or Lumas.

Her reason for not swinging as sword is cause she wasn't trained to swing a sword, that's what the soldiers are for 

Well her soldiers aren't exactly doing a very good job of protecting her, are they?

[Hakudamashi]

Yeah, because it's impossible to escape when you've got incompetent fools like Bowser keeping you. Peach has no problem going through 8 worlds of danger in 3D World, but she can't help herself when she's trapped by Bowser.

I don't like how ur undermining the implications of being "trapped".

And yet every time the male hero is captured there's always a method of escape that you go through. You never wait for someone to come get you, you're always able to save yourself.

That is a negative sir, it depends on the writer and the context. Captured men can, and have been just as helpless when they're kidnapped by a villain of serious business.

Link's reason for saving the world doesn't always have to be "because the princess was captured." Why must that always be his goal? Yeah, I know why, Zelda contains a piece of the Triforce and Ganon has to kidnap her to get to it. But because of this, the same stereotypical story gets repeated every game. Would it kill them to be a bit more original?

I always find a plea for originality in a long running franchise to be asinine. Care to explain why you can't play a different game?

And Zelda isn't also serious business? She's the one who rules her own kingdom and shit.

So what? people of serious business cannot be outsmarted? Overwhelmed? Bested? Ganondorf beat her, he had the better plan, was better equipped, was more cunning. Gender, has nothing to do with it.

It is convenient. We're led to believe that Bowser keeps Peach super-secure so that she can't escape but that Mario is able to just waltz in. Bowser having a big ego is a dumb excuse. If that were the case then he would have likely let Peach roam free as well. And while being let out of her cage in 3D Land Peach didn't even attempt to escape?

Ego is a valid excuse, it's Bowser's character, which has been consistent. He has a big ego, and is arrogant, and he always believes he'll beat Mario, so he lets him in, but in some cases, the door doesn't open till he collects some power stars or something for the days Bowser just doesn't feel like fighting I guess.
And she did try to escape obviously, but she got caught again, cause the castle is locked up, hovering above lava. And I doubt she could find a 1-up somewhere amidst fleeing for her life so that she could try jumping out a window.

Zelda being put under petrification is another dumb excuse. If it's so easy to capture people through petrification, why wouldn't Ganon also capture Link this way? That would be the logical thing to do. But no, of course the game is written so that Zelda is captured with no means of escaping while Link is free to go after her.

Did you stop to consider maybe such a powerful magic can't be done whenever he wants? Maybe he made the conscious decision to go for Zelda because, gee, I dunno, he found her first? Zelda's the princess, ain't hard to find, who the fuck is Link? Just some random ass kid, how would he even go about looking for him? Then you have games, where the villain WOULD have killed Link on the spot, but Link gets saved by someone else.

It's not that you're saving a woman, it's that the woman is always incapable of saving herself and she is ultimately just used as a lazy plot device. It never needs to be a woman that's stolen, it could just as easily be some object like Shine Sprites or Lumas.

That sir, is a matter of preference, and where "creative freedom" kicks in.

Well her soldiers aren't exactly doing a very good job of protecting her, are they?

That is a job for the Captain of the guard. Tell him to train properly for The Great King of Evil during a time of peace where the greatest sparring partners they have are wildlife and each other 

[Elija2]

I don't like how ur undermining the implications of being "trapped".

It's a Mario game.

That is a negative sir, it depends on the writer and the context. Captured men can, and have been just as helpless when they're kidnapped by a villain of serious business.

Care to share some examples? Because it's certainly not as common as when women are the ones captured.

I always find a plea for originality in a long running franchise to be asinine. Care to explain why you can't play a different game?

Really? Asking for originality in unfair now (especially when the plot changes every game anyway)? I suppose you'd be fine then if Zelda followed the same basic dungeon formula with the same exact items and same areas for each and every game?

So what? people of serious business cannot be outsmarted? Overwhelmed? Bested? Ganondorf beat her, he had the better plan, was better equipped, was more cunning. Gender, has nothing to do with it.

You don't think gender has something to do with it when "damsel in distress" is a super-common stereotype in storytelling?

Ego is a valid excuse, it's Bowser's character, which has been consistent. He has a big ego, and is arrogant, and he always believes he'll beat Mario, so he lets him in, but in some cases, the door doesn't open till he collects some power stars or something for the days Bowser just doesn't feel like fighting I guess.
And she did try to escape obviously, but she got caught again, cause the castle is locked up, hovering above lava. And I doubt she could find a 1-up somewhere amidst fleeing for her life so that she could try jumping out a window.

She can float though, jumping out of a window would be totally fine.

Did you stop to consider maybe such a powerful magic can't be done whenever he wants? Maybe he made the conscious decision to go for Zelda because, gee, I dunno, he found her first? Zelda's the princess, ain't hard to find, who the fuck is Link? Just some random ass kid, how would he even go about looking for him? Then you have games, where the villain WOULD have killed Link on the spot, but Link gets saved by someone else.

Link is the hero of Hyrule, I think Ganon would have heard of him.

That sir, is a matter of preference, and where "creative freedom" kicks in.

What do you mean it's a matter of preference? If the princess is going to be used as nothing more than a reward at the end of the game, why wouldn't it be better to just replace her with an object? If her kidnapping was used as something more than just a lazy motivation for the hero then I would be fine with it, but if it isn't then you're just perpetuating a lazy stereotype.

And I don't know why you keep bringing up creative freedom. I'm not infringing on anyone's creative freedom by criticizing their game.

[Hakudamashi]

It's a Mario game.

Doesn't make the concept of being "trapped" any less dire.

Care to share some examples? Because it's certainly not as common as when women are the ones captured.

I'll get back to you on that cause I'm tired.

Really? Asking for originality in unfair now (especially when the plot changes every game anyway)? I suppose you'd be fine then if Zelda followed the same basic dungeon formula with the same exact items and same areas for each and every game?

If that's what the fans are into. I'm a believer of "If it ain't broke don't fix it". If there's gonna be change in the formula, it ought to be when the developer wants to try something new.

You don't think gender has something to do with it when "damsel in distress" is a super-common stereotype in storytelling?

No, I don't.

She can float though, jumping out of a window would be totally fine.

She can't float indefinitely, and there is lava, right outside.
If Mario with a Tanooki suit makes it with close calls, I doubt Peach would press her luck.

Link is the hero of Hyrule, I think Ganon would have heard of him.

Each Link is a different character, and the legacy of all the past Links are only past down as legend, with his only trademarks being that he wears green and holds the master sword
Many people wear green in the Zelda universe, and in some cases, Link doesn't even wear green in the beginning. He's just a simple village kid, he doesn't even "earn" the Triforce of Courage till he pasts some tests, so Ganon can't even look for that either.

What do you mean it's a matter of preference? If the princess is going to be used as nothing more than a reward at the end of the game, why wouldn't it be better to just replace her with an object? If her kidnapping was used as something more than just a lazy motivation for the hero then I would be fine with it, but if it isn't then you're just perpetuating a lazy stereotype.

I'd prefer to get a woman at the end of my adventure so I can proceed to write a fanfic about their happily ever after. I can't have a happily ever after with an object, but some people will like those cause they're shiny and holds value like a medal. 'Tis a preference, what would you rather fight for?

And I don't know why you keep bringing up creative freedom. I'm not infringing on anyone's creative freedom by criticizing their game.

I brought it up cause you insisted on replacing women with objects.
Well what if the developer wanted it to be a woman? That's his/her choice.