After watching all three of Anita's video's on the damsel in distress trope (and yes, I did take it one step further than needed), I have to say that I do like some of the things that she has to say, but I am still on the edge about a few things.
To start off, lets look at her argument about using the whole "damsel in distress" troupe. For one thing, I do agree that it would be cool if there were a game where the damsel in question were to save herself, but on the other hand, she makes it sound as if using the trope in general is purely misogynistic. While yes, it is probably something that has been overused a lot, this trope has existed for a long time before video games were created and will most likely be used for a long time to come in other various forms of media and literature. I highly doubt that the writers were intentionally trying to bash on women and were probably just using a formula that has worked in the past.
On the other hand, I do agree with her on how the trope of being forced to kill the damsel you were trying to save is just wrong. You can argue that the trope of damsel in distress does enforce the idea that anyone should be willing to endure any sort of suffering, even going through hell and back (sometimes literally in video games) to keep their loved ones safe, but what does killing them off do? While violence is a major feature in the majority of video games, there is no need to turn everything into a violent act, especially if the main character is supposed to have feelings for the damsel.
Hopefully, with the rise of female gamers and games involving a female protagonist, tropes like this will start to become less common. However, I don't see the trope going away anytime soon and there is also no need to automatically claim that the game and/or it's developers are misogynistic if they use it. I'm not saying that you should just accept it, instead, if you really want things to change, you should take an active role and seek to make changes on your own.
No comments:
Post a Comment