How Sexist Is Your Favorite Video Game?

The various faces of Juliet Starling, the protagonist of Lollipop Chainsaw.<a href="http://theclassicgamer.com/lollipop-chainsaw-review/">TheClassicGamer.com</a>

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Hollywood movies, television, and video games are meant to entertain and transport us outside of our narrow realities, but what if our favorite escapes are perpetuating damaging stereotypes? In her video series, Feminist Frequency—which has garnered her some extreme hateful backlash—pop-culture critic Anita Sarkeesian tackles unflattering portrayals of women in media. You may recognize some of the following tropes. Quotes are from Sarkeesian.

1. The Damsel in Distress

A female character who is “placed in a perilous situation from which she cannot escape on her own and must then be rescued by a male character.” Examples: Zelda in The Legend of Zelda, Princess Peach in Super Mario Bros: The Great Mission to Save Princess Peach, Krystal in Star Fox Adventures for Gamecube.

2. The Ms. Male Character

“The female version of an already established or default male character,” usually identified by long eyelashes, lipstick, hair ribbons, heels, or the color pink. Examples: Ms. Pac-Man, Amy Rose from Sonic the Hedgehog, Minnie Mouse, Peb and Pab from Bubble Bobble, and the pink boulder from Giant Boulder of Death.

3. Women in Refrigerators

A female character’s rape, murder, or victimization is the impetus “to move the male character’s story arc forward.” Examples: The Green Lantern, whose protagonist finds his girlfriend’s body in a fridge; the Max Payne games, wherein Max seeks revenge for his murdered wife and child; and Braveheart, whose Scottish protagonist (Mel Gibson) launches a revolution after the king executes his wife.

4. The Manic Pixie Dream Girl

A bubbly, childlike muse who exists to help the troubled male protagonist escape “doom and gloom”. Examples: Kirsten Dunst in Elizabethtown, Zooey Deschanel in 500 Days of Summer, Natalie Portman in Garden State.

5. The Evil Demon Seductress

“A supernatural creature, usually a demon, robot, alien, or vampire, most often disguised as a sexy human female.” Examples: Isabel Lucas in Transformers 3, Laura Harris in The Faculty, Natasha Henstridge in Species, Poison Ivy in the Batman series, the fembots in Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me.

6. The Straw Feminist

“A deliberately created, exaggerated characterization of a feminist that is used to undermine and ridicule the feminist movement.” Examples: The villains in the last season of Veronica Mars, Marcy Darcy in Married with Children, Phil and Lil’s mother in The Rugrats, Femme Fatale in The Powerpuff Girls.

7. The Mystical Pregnancy

A female character is impregnated by supernatural reproductive technology. Examples: Skully in The X-files, Starbuck in Battlestar Galactica, Deanna Troy from Star Trek, the Next Generation (who is impregnated by a ball of space energy).

8. Women as Decoration

“Female bodies exploited to infuse gritty or racy texture into game-worlds…These virtual women are often programmed as minimally interactive sex objects to be used and abused by the player.” Examples: Popular franchises like Hitman, Need for Speed, Assassin’s Creed, and Grand Theft Auto.

8. Women as Reward

Wherein the successful game player is rewarded for accomplishments with “unlockable hyper-sexualized costumes for female characters” or racy “cinematics and/or hidden items or artwork.” Examples: Especially prevalent in combat-heavy series’ like Dead or Alive, Tekken, and Soul Calibur.

9. The Fighting Fuck Toy

This “hyper-sexualized, hyper-violent female character presents the illusion of female empowerment but is designed as a sexual fantasy.” Examples: Tomb Raider‘s Lara Croft, Juliet Starling from Lollipop Chainsaw, and the title character in the game Bayonetta.

Click here to read our chat with Sarkeesian.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate