Gamers Are Excited to Attack and Kill Feminists in the Game

[ZehnBoat]

https://twitter.com/tgheretford/status/1060251871485612032

if you can't see it, this is what is posted

 

[UnKillFill]

Hot take: we should make it legal to punch 'nazis' in public, but swerve them by also making it legal to punch 'feminazis' in public.

 

[Nazi vegeta]

Happened the same thing with watch dogs. Kotaku wrote an article about this video (the original had like 300k+ views) and it probably got removed once googles new policies got in place

 

[Replicant Sasquatch]

Happened the same thing with watch dogs. Kotaku wrote an article about this video (the original had like 300k+ views) and it probably got removed once googles new policies got in place

First time i've seen this in a format other than "polplaysvidya.webm"

 

[Munchingonfish]

Very subtle bit of election skullduggery by the Liberal boffins at Rockstar being pulled off here, the Gamer-American community will be too engrossed in their cowboy game and firing imaginary sixshooters excitedly at representations of marginalised communities to go out and vote for Orange Hitler again. Why do you think they released the game so close to polling day?

View attachment 585279

http://archive.is/qSIZl

 

[UE 558]

you can lynch fems and watch kkk accidentally kill themselves, because R* believes in equal opportunity

 

[c-no]

Why outrage now, when people have been doing this is in past Rockstar games?

Because it's current year and killing a virtual woman means you're a misogynerd. That's what some spergs would think without realizing one would also indulge in being a bloody psycho that's a dick to all the NPC's in-game.

Hoping daily stormer responds by bashing this part of the game, two exceptional individuals for the price of one

Such a thing would help it all evolve from cancerous YouTube comments to outraged click bait.

If the character was deliberately some shrill harpy who antagonized you every time you show up then violent retribution would be way funnier. Like that reporter from Mass Effect (which I'm surprised the usual suspects haven't dredged up yet). But she's just some woman calling for a right to vote. It's obvious he was trying to get exactly the reaction he got.

Suspending his account for that is fucking bonkers though.

And far as the worst thing said lady does is being ignorant in thinking having a woman as president will lead to peace without realizing that politics will still lead to being screwed over and calling the main character "young man". Other than that, not really much an antagonizing character like say Catalina from San Andreas.

His account is no longer suspended though its still stupid to close the channel simply because of the edgy videos. If comments are that much of a problem, people should remember YouTube comments are always going to have cringy post and the like.

 

[Mammamia in Naziland]

BACKSTORY:

The newly launched videogame Red Dead Redemption 2, taking place in the not-so-Far West in 1889 includes suffragettes as NPCs, in line with the historical period portrayed. Being an open-world game, then, of course you can punch, hurt and kill said NPCs, KKK members and pesky women asking for the right to vote included.

This has triggered some journalist at Vice, who three days ago wrote a hit piece against them evilZ videogamers:

http://archive.is/v4B0U

Some excerpts:

Given that Red Dead Redemption 2 is the biggest video game of the year and that much of video game culture is ensconced in blatant misogyny, it's not surprising but still upsetting that some players are delighted that the game lets them beat, abuse, and kill these characters.

Players can shoot, rob, talk to, and beat up almost any character they see, which at times leads to surprising outcomes.

Ah, so it's not gendered violence. Good we are on the same page.

It's this same design that allowed a YouTuber going by the handle Shirrako to upload a video of himself walking up to that suffragette and punching her unconscious.

The comments on these videos, as you might expect, are horrible. Some users think it's hilarious, others say that this is what every feminist deserves, while others complain about how alimony laws favor women and echo other "men's rights" talking points.

...or maybe not. Is then Shirrako a dangerous mysoginist?

I asked Shirrako why they think the video blew up, and about the comments it's been getting. "I know you're probably expecting some political answer but the truth is it was simply a funny moment from one of my streams which I've decided to upload as a separate video," they said. "Not sure if it was intentional by Rockstar Games but the NPC is made to be rather annoying, when you try to shop for clothing in the game, your dialogue with the shop keeper keeps being interrupted by her shouting, so I simply wanted to shop in peace, I'm sure that as a gamer you're familiar with these annoying NPC situations. [...] I mean obviously I don't agree with the sexist comments, but there is not much I can do about them, I don't like censoring people's opinions, regardless if I like them or not," they said.

Then it's the studio's fault, clearly!

This means that despite any thoughts that Rockstar Games might have about Shirrako’s video, the ability to punch and kill a suffragette in Red Dead Redemption 2 is something that the studio deliberately chose to put into the game.

I haven't finished it yet, but I doubt that Red Dead Redemption 2 has anything profound to say about women's rights

I don't think video games alone can be blamed for real-world violence, but they are a part of our cultural infrastructure that allows someone to roleplay as an anti-feminist murderer (a very real, ongoing problem in the real world), upload a video of it to YouTube for profit, and allow others to use that video as a jumping off point to discuss how much they hate women in the real world.

And lo and behold, shortly after Shirrako's channel got completely deleted. I guess Rockstar Games on the other hand are too big fishes for you guys:

https://twitter.com/ShirrakoGaming/status/1060191013803905025




(Bonus: Boogie being the usual sniveling, cowardly fence-sitter)

But, plot twist! After people started clamoring, the channel got promptly reinstated! The Global Head of Gaming at Youtube personally wrote some backhand apology... surely the channel being deleted was but a mistake!

https://twitter.com/ShirrakoGaming/status/1060303328452710401
https://twitter.com/Fwiz/status/1060299241317232640

"I swear, the guy who deleted the video instigated by the Vice article will be sent to a gulag and reformed, erm, I mean, we have competent methods for content reviewing, everything works just fine!"

https://archive.fo/ZI9fj



Conclusion:
This time, because of the almost immediate backlash on Twitter, everything ended 'well' (except for the poor sod who deleted the channel, if his boss is to be believed).
What I find troubling is the almost immediate action taken arbitrarily by Youtube after one biased article on the subject had been published. O tempora, o mores!

ETA: Timeline and some sources shamelessly taken from Kotaku in Action subreddit.

 

[Zaragoza]

These are the type of videos that Youtube is trying to get rid of. I have to say it's pretty funny.

 

[Hux]

NPCs look after their own, it seems

 

[Sam Losco]

This is the most annoying NPC I've found so far. You can hear the bitch yelling from a block away.

 

[c-no]

Already got a thread about this in gaming.
https://kiwifarms.net/threads/gamers-are-excited-to-attack-and-kill-feminists-in-the-game.49655/

These are the type of videos that Youtube is trying to get rid of. I have to say it's pretty funny.

It's really nothing more than edgy shit that does well to kick the hives. All that said, YouTube has worst shit towards women than that.

 

[It's HK-47]

Hundreds of thousands of millions of hours of game footage murdering men:

Fucking a flesh wound in a man's taint in Outlast:

Gratuitous, slow-motion explosion of Hitler's testicle in Sniper Elite:

Punching this specific woman in a cowboy game:

Yeah, those aren't confusing standards at all. Thanks, YouTube. Did I miss something else this guy did on the side to warrant that sort of reaction from them? Because otherwise this just seems like a really wild, irrational decision on their part and I am struggling to understand why they'd go that far if that's all he was doing.

 

[Mammamia in Naziland]

Already got a thread about this in gaming.

D'oh! I stupidly checked in Multimedia and in here, and there were no results for 'Shirrako' after a query in the whole forum, I thought I was fine. I will ask the mods to close this clone then.

 

[⋖ cørdion ⋗]

But, plot twist! After people started clamoring, the channel got promptly reinstated! The Global Head of Gaming at Youtube personally wrote some backhand apology... surely the channel being deleted was but a mistake!

Keem the GOAT of YouTube with what, 4m subs? How he managed is beyond me but it's hilarious how much weigh he pulls, despite nobody watching his show unironically.

Like, does YouTube not have an internal form with a demand of second opinion to delete channels? Write 2 paragraphs why someone deserves their potential livelihood ruined, have someone else read through it with screencaps etc before deciding? Or maybe they do, but they're all dangerhair trans cucks.

(Bonus: Boogie being the usual sniveling, cowardly fence-sitter)

"Huh. Clicks [X] on DM".

 

[Judge Holden]

Ya know I have a solution to the idiotic and entirely ineffective ideology based censorship thats infesting places like youtube and beyond.

Outsource all the "review and flag for actually illegal shit" jobs to places like fucking Uganda and Mongolia.

Places that are so entirely removed from western political/social discourse that they wont even think about deleting entire channels because a creepy soy based lifeform on kotaku whined about it being problematic or because a REEEsetera thread spammed youtube with obviously horseshit complaints

Boom. You help build up the tech industry in third world nations, help clear up censorship, give deserving and impartial niggers jobs, the tech companies save a nice bit of money, and most importantly you get a few dozen squealing dangerhairs added to San Fransisco's homeless population. Literally everybody wins.

 

[UnclePhil]

Given that Red Dead Redemption 2 is the biggest video game of the year and that much of video game culture is ensconced in blatant misogyny,

Almost stopped reading here.

it's not surprising but still upsetting that some players are delighted that the game lets them beat, abuse, and kill these characters.

Who?

One of the main reasons Red Dead Redemption 2 is such an interesting game is that it allows the player to approach and resolve situations in a variety of ways. Players can shoot, rob, talk to, and beat up almost any character they see, which at times leads to surprising outcomes.

Open-world sandbox games have been around a while. This doesn't make RDR 2 unique or interesting in that regard.

It's this same design that allowed a YouTuber going by the handle Shirrako to upload a video of himself walking up to that suffragette and punching her unconscious. The video, titled "Red Dead Redemption 2 - Beating Up Annoying Feminist," was uploaded on October 28 and currently has 1.2 million views.

1.2 million views, eh? Well, "Beating Up Annoying Feminist" is a rather clickbaity headline. And a lot of people are annoyed by feminists right now, including many women. Case in point, this article.

Shirrako, perhaps because they saw how popular the video became, quickly followed it up with a video of them trying to feed the suffragette to an alligator and another of them lassoing and leaving her on the train tracks to get hit by a train.

Are there hidden trophies for these?

The comments on these videos, as you might expect,

Do I?

are horrible. Some users think it's hilarious, others say that this is what every feminist deserves, while others complain about how alimony laws favor women and echo other "men's rights" talking points.

Okay. But what about everyone else commenting?

"I killed that lady too," user Joker Productions, a channel with over 120,000 subscribers, wrote.

There seems to be a heavy focus on views and subscription counts here. Is this indicative of a Problem, or is the channel just popular to begin with?

"Every time I went to the tailor right there I had to listen to her yapping. Got fed up so I took her to lunch... except the only thing served was buckshot."

It would piss me off if I was trying to do some mundane thing and an NPC (the kind in video games) keeps annoying me with the same repeated line. Just saying. Patrolling, the Mojave, you know - almost makes you wish for a nuclear winter.

"You could take this small portion of the game, stretch it to full AAA game length, charge me $60 for it, and I'd pre-order it with a season pass," a user named Silly Goose wrote.

'K, so that's Silly Goose's take on it.

I asked Shirrako why they thinks his video blew up, and the comments it's been getting.

"I know you're probably expecting some political answer

Which I'm sure this journo was. Moving on.

but the truth is it was simply a funny moment from one of my streams which I've decided to upload as a separate video," they said.

Which I'm sure is what they thought.

"Not sure if it was intentional by Rockstar Games but the NPC is made to be rather annoying, when you try to shop for clothing in the game, your dialogue with the shop keeper keeps being interrupted by her shouting, so I simply wanted to shop in peace, I'm sure that as a gamer you're familiar with these annoying NPC situations."

Probably not, considering it's some moral panic journalist from Vice. I digress.

Shirrako said that most people are aware the video is a joke,

You're not allowed to be funny anymore, Shirrako. It's 2018. Get woke or die trying.

and that he's aware that others have posted toxic comments, while others are deeply offended by the video.

Right, because it's YouTube, the grand palace of intelligent conversation.

"I mean obviously I don't agree with the sexist comments, but there is not much I can do about them, I don't like censoring people's opinions, regardless if I like them or not," they said.

Good.

Developer Rockstar Games has always had to deal with controversy around the kind of things players are able to do in its open, intricate worlds. Grand Theft Auto III, the first 3D game in the series and a blueprint for the entire open world style of game so dominant in the industry today, was infamous for letting players sleep with sex workers and killing them after to take their money back.

I was waiting for that. Was not disappointed.

That doesn't mean Rockstar Games endorses that type of behavior, nor that Red Dead Redemption 2 endorses punching feminists, but it's worth thinking about what these open worlds allow players to do, why, and how they correspond with what's happening in the real world.

Oh, God. Here we go...

It's important to note that despite Red Dead Redemption 2 giving players a lot of choice in how they approach situations and many activities to partake in (hunting, poker, fishing), it doesn't literally let them do anything, nor does it let them avoid certain actions. Arthur Morgan, the protagonist and player character, can't just retire and become a school teacher on some remote frontier town. The player can't decide, for example, to roleplay the game as an aspiring pianist. It's a game about outlaws, and players can decide if they want to be kind-hearted, conflicted outlaws or outright psychopaths, but they're going to be robbing and shooting people either way.

That's because it's a cowboy Wild West outlaw game with cowboy outlaws and a specific narrative, not the fucking Sims.

This means that despite any thoughts that Rockstar Games might have about Shirrako’s video, the ability to punch and kill a suffragette in Red Dead Redemption 2 is something that the studio deliberately chose to put into the game. Players can't, as far as I can tell, sleep with sex workers, even when they offer their services. Rockstar Games also chose not to include the ability to kill children in Red Dead Redemption 2, despite it being unrealistic. These are conscious choices about what limitations to put on the player.

# 1. It's an open sandbox game. If you couldn't punch a random adult because she's a woman it would make no sense. In that case you shouldn't be allowed to punch anybody, or do anything bad.

# 2. You've never been allowed to kill children in a Rockstar game. There's never been an elementary school or a playground in a Rockstar city. The ESRB frowns upon that sort of thing. So do the people who have Rockstar in their crosshairs over a decade. It's an adult-only universe. Children only exist in the radio commercials (getting Napalm germ killer poured on them, oh wait.)

# 3. You weren't allowed to sleep with sex workers in Red Dead Redemption 1, so I suppose this is keeping with the formula.

# 4. Just because you're not allowed to do some shit doesn't mean it has to be open season on everything else. Again, it wouldn't be a sandbox game if that were the case.

It's also important to note that the suffragette is not portrayed in a neutral manner. Rockstar Games makes choices here as well. Since Red Dead Redemption 2 allows players to explore the world in whatever order they want, I first encountered the suffragettes in a totally different part of the world. It was in a small southern town called Rhodes, where a plantation owner’s grandson had a forbidden love with the daughter of a rival family. His love interest was a suffragette, and he wanted me to tag along with her during a protest to make sure she wouldn't get hurt. That's a legitimate and historically accurate concern, as suffragettes were publicly beaten, sexually assaulted, imprisoned, and force fed.

I thought it was an interesting backdrop for a mission, and that it was smart for Rockstar Games to highlight some of the horrifying inequalities that defined the American frontier just as much as cowboy hats and six shooters, but I also felt that it was mostly included for flavor. It didn't say that the suffragettes were good or bad, just that they existed.

Flavor? It's 1899 and this is a thing that was happening. However, the main focus is on cowboy outlaws. The suffragettes are in the background as part of the historical setting. They don't need to be anything else in a game about survivalist cowboy outlaws. Ever heard the K.I.S.S. rule, "Keep It Short and Simple?" Chekhov's Gun?

How are players supposed to feel about this?

How are they, Vice journo? Tell me.

Do players think that the suffragette in Saint Denis is annoying because that's the baggage they bring to the game, or is she portrayed unsympathetically?

What's Dead-Eye like in this one? Are there collectibles? Do you get regenerating health like last time?

When players approach the suffragette in Saint Denis and she asks Arthur what he thinks about women's suffrage and their right to vote, he says, "Sure, why not." He follows that up with, "Anyone dumb enough to vote, I say go for it," which is the level of sophistication and political commentary I would expect from a developer whose debut Grand Theft Auto was celebrated for having a fart button.

Okay, so is this another example of Rockstar's (admittedly dumb in case) social commentary, or is Arthur's opinion on the intelligence of voting indicative of his character? What kind of background does Arthur come from? How was he raised? What's the political climate in his neck of the woods? Is he a critical thinker, does he go outside the box or is he more simple-minded?

I haven't played the game yet. This person isn't giving me a lot of context to go on.

I haven't finished it yet,

Ah.

but I doubt that Red Dead Redemption 2 has anything profound to say about women's rights, and I doubt that it is advocating that type of behavior, in-game. I only know that it allows it, while not allowing other things.

I'm sorry, do you want children to die onscreen? Would being able to fuck a hooker make you happier since you're allowed to punch a protester? I'm confused.

I don't think video games alone can be blamed for real-world violence, but they are a part of our cultural infrastructure that allows someone to roleplay as an anti-feminist murderer (a very real, ongoing problem in the real world), upload a video of it to YouTube for profit, and allow others to use that video as a jumping off point to discuss how much they hate women in the real world.

Which, translated, sounds like you do think video games can cause real-world issues.

Vice is useless.

 

[drtoboggan]

The way I see it, they're making it equal opportunity. It's misogynist to not allow you to beat up women in the 19th century.

 

[SiccDicc]

The way I see it, they're making it equal opportunity. It's misogynist to not allow you to beat up women in the 19th century.

It's also historically inaccurate.

 

[UE 558]

Okay, so is this another example of Rockstar's (admittedly dumb in case) social commentary, or is Arthur's opinion on the intelligence of voting indicative of his character? What kind of background does Arthur come from? How was he raised? What's the political climate in his neck of the woods? Is he a critical thinker, does he go outside the box or is he more simple-minded?

I think it's Arthur's character, he has been an enemy of the law most of his adult life and he and Dutch's gang are also very nomadic. Therefor, he has little reason to care about politics because it either involves places that he won't live in for more than a few weeks or a federal government that'd likely want him executed