Penny Arcade and 'The Mike Problem'

[korvys]

That's true. I'm not sure why you said it though. No one has said any of those things.

[Duckay]

Isn't "The joke is making fun of the assholes" essentially the same thing as "But really we're Mocking that kind of thing."?

[korvys]

Hmmm, I'm not sure I agree, but I see what you mean.

[Bebop Man]

Lazy arguments used to defend lazy writing that promotes lazy stereotypes.

What lazy arguments?

[Lord Hosk]

I don't know how I feel about that.

...
I honestly don't understand what you're getting at.

The article starts with,

Orange is the New Black is a Netflix original show about women in prison. Though not without problematic elements, as pretty much everything spawned by our culture is, it nonetheless stands head and shoulders above so much else on offer in its portrayal of a wide variety of complex, interesting women – women of colour, transwomen, poor women, criminal women, disabled women, mentally ill women, queer women, immigrant women, religious women, atheist women – with a depth, compassion and, above all, narrative primacy that exists almost nowhere else on television. It’s a clever, well-written, engaging show, and it’s doing something important.

So, naturally, its value is immediately reduced to being a source of hot topless chicks for straight dudes to gawk at.

The Author finishes with this.

Here is a fucking exercise for you, geeky straight men of the internet: STOP MAKING YOUR JUVENILE OBSESSION WITH BOOBIES THE PUNCHLINE TO EVERY FUCKING JOKE YOU TELL. STOP REDUCING US TO BODIES AND OVERSEXUALISED BITS BECAUSE YOU’RE TOO FUCKING COWARDLY TO TRY SEEING US AS PEOPLE WHILE YOUR FRIENDS ARE LAUGHING. Because I, and other women everywhere, are fucking TIRED of your bullshit. Feminism holds that you’re better than this; that you’re 100% capable of treating us respectfully, and not just slaves to some hopeless caveman impulse beyond intelligence or reasoning. WE KNOW YOU ARE BETTER THAN THIS.

My point is, that this dismisses the show itself as the problem and puts all the blame for this on straight males. Ms. Meadows is not complaining about the show at all, or the women who create it, in fact just the opposite she praises it as a paragon with standard cultural deficiencies. I am saying that she places the blame entirely on men for reducing women to oversexualised bits when its the show, created by women, that is doing that quite nicely. Further "STOP MAKING YOUR JUVENILE OBSESSION WITH BOOBIES THE PUNCHLINE TO EVERY FUCKING JOKE YOU TELL", sure thats hyperbole, but from my quick check of the past 20 comics with jokes three have been about women one has been about a woman's body, and you have to skip past the 10 strips in the middle which glorify a young girl coming of age and finding her strength as a woman.

[mariomario42]

Lazy arguments used to defend lazy writing that promotes lazy stereotypes.

What lazy arguments?

Jokes can't be jokes anymore. Everything is a political agenda and calling a horse a horse is now a lazy argument.

[Lord Hosk]

If the entire show was of the quality of the first few episodes where nudity is used as a way to make the character uncomfortable that would be one thing, but the show quickly dissolves from a character driven narrative about a fish out of water with good writing and strong women into "look at these tits, look the chicks are having sex" I really enjoyed the first few episodes and thought it was great, I watched the rest of the run constantly telling my wife how disappointed I was that it just became soft core porn instead of the drama it started as.

[JackSlack]

Jokes can't be jokes anymore. Everything is a political agenda and calling a horse a horse is now a lazy argument.

Well, yes.

The personal is political. Like it or not, every joke, every story, every anecdote contributes to culture. If the joke, if the story, if the anecdote contributes to a culture that devalues women (and yup, this one does) then people are going to call it out.

So no. Jokes can't be jokes anymore. And they never were.

Deal with it.

[Bebop Man]

Personally I find the whole chicken-that-crossed-the-road joke deplorably right-wing and downright sexist D:

[JackSlack]

Bebop: It's freaking classist, man! Keepin' a workin' chicken down.

[Bebop Man]

It is of course a thinly-veiled allegory for illegal immigration in the Mexican-US border, wherein "the chicken" is the Mexican, "the road" is Río Grande and "the other side" is the proverbial land of opportunity. The joke makes it obvious that crossing over to the US is an end in itself because of the tacit socio-economic benefits. Immigration must be mocked, and therefore, repelled. So it is indeed Republican garble. Also care notice the choice of "chicken" - an animal associated with slow wits and cowardice, perpetrating the typically disgusting stereotyping of the sudaca.

[KiteNeravar]

really well thought out, but the joke predates the Republican party by about 7 years

[Bebop Man]

Ah, but who's to say they didn't popularize it?

[mariomario42]

The personal is political. Like it or not, every joke, every story, every anecdote contributes to culture.

Haha, that's the real joke here.

What's brown and sticky?
A stick.

You are reaching if you think that contributes anything to culture. Seems like a bunch of "technically"s, like technically that hydrogen atom on the other side of the universe is applying a force on you.

Also, how did it get about women? The comic doesn't mention women, or even show them.

[MatParker116]

The problem with boycotting PAX is for a lot of companies there isn't really an alternative. RTX may be that alternative at the rate it's growing but right now it's a case of a choice of feeling better about yourself or potentially loosing out on what I imagine for a lot of companies is there main source of revenue.

[JackSlack]

You are reaching if you think that contributes anything to culture.

It's a cultural item, so, yes, it does. In that case, it's little more than a wordplay, and I think it's pretty contained. But yes, I stand by it: Every joke, every story, every anecdote contributes to culture. Nothing is an island.

The problem with boycotting PAX is for a lot of companies there isn't really an alternative. RTX may be that alternative at the rate it's growing but right now it's a case of a choice of feeling better about yourself or potentially loosing out on what I imagine for a lot of companies is there main source of revenue.

OK, without dismissing your point, which is valid enough: HOLY SHIT. Rooster Teeth has a con now? How the hell did that gang get so fucking big? I mean, geeze, RvB was fun enough for a few episodes, but I never realised just how much Rooster Teeth goddamn exploded.

Edit:

Also, Bebop? Nice.

[Elomin Sha]

RoosterTeeth had their 3rd con. This year they had over 10,000 attendees. RTX 2012 was also the first con where the public could play Halo 4. They did have an issue at this year's con. Doctor NerdLove was giving out free stickers: Fake Geek Girl. These were to poke fun at the concept of Fake Geek Girl that has cropped up. Someone took a whole bunch of them and slapping them on the rears of female event goers. The Guardians found the person doing it threw him out and is now banned from returning.

http://kotaku.com/fake-geek-girl-sticke ... -697482309

Not only do they have RvB. They have the Minecraft Let's Plays from their Achievement Hunter portion. From a drunken joke by Slo Mo Guys', Gavin Free creating the Tower of Pimps it was included in the recent update to the 360's Minecraft in the tutorial world (Go to the sand biome and dig into the temple from the top). They have also made two decent series: Gauntlet and Immersion (Mythbusters for video games), and now Rwby.

[MatParker116]

You are reaching if you think that contributes anything to culture.

It's a cultural item, so, yes, it does. In that case, it's little more than a wordplay, and I think it's pretty contained. But yes, I stand by it: Every joke, every story, every anecdote contributes to culture. Nothing is an island.

The problem with boycotting PAX is for a lot of companies there isn't really an alternative. RTX may be that alternative at the rate it's growing but right now it's a case of a choice of feeling better about yourself or potentially loosing out on what I imagine for a lot of companies is there main source of revenue.

OK, without dismissing your point, which is valid enough: HOLY SHIT. Rooster Teeth has a con now? How the hell did that gang get so fucking big? I mean, geeze, RvB was fun enough for a few episodes, but I never realised just how much Rooster Teeth goddamn exploded.

Edit:

Also, Bebop? Nice. [/quote]
There actually a bigger company than Penny Arcade now with 60+ employees. As for the Dr Nerdlove/GeekGirl thing at RTX this year Rooster Teeth handled it fantastically according to Nerdlove's wife:

They haven't caught the guy (yet, as of the end of the day yesterday), but all props to the RTX Guardians who were *right the fuck on top of this* immediately. They contacted the Doc within about half an hour or 45 minutes of it all happening (which is pretty good, considering the size of the con, and trying to find someone to talk to them directly), and they were completely professional and very concerned that they get to the bottom of exactly what was going on and, at minimum, the activity stop and ideally, that it stop and the guy get thrown out of the con. (He seems to have stopped as soon as security was alerted, because they had no further reports of harassment after they started investigating.)

[Duckay]

I am saying that she places the blame entirely on men for reducing women to oversexualised bits when its the show, created by women, that is doing that quite nicely.

Essentially, your problem is that you think she is deliberately fixating on men as the problem?

I don't believe that's quite true. For a start, she did not ignore the problems in the show itself; she mentioned them, and then went on to list the facets of the show that she believes are more important that the show is doing well. The point of the article was to decry the fact that these other things that she has observed in the show are being ignored in favour of tits by the other members of the audience.

But that brings me to my next point. Whether it is the audience doing it (as she clearly believes) or the writing team doing it, it's still bad. It does not matter if it is men or women doing it. Every time I read your posts, Lord Hosk, a voice in the back of my head asks why it matters whether the show is produced by men or women in this discussion, and I think that's what it comes down to.

[Lord Hosk]

Essentially, your problem is that you think she is deliberately fixating on men as the problem?

No, thats not my problem at all, thats not what I said. My problem is that she is fixating on the audience being the problem. Specifically the male members of the audience as she puts it.

I don't believe that's quite true. For a start, she did not ignore the problems in the show itself; she mentioned them,

She mentions and dismisses them in the same sentence. In the only negative thing she says about the show she makes a Fallacious argument by trying to make any disagreement to her point seem fallacious.

Though not without problematic elements, as pretty much everything spawned by our culture is,

and then went on to list the facets of the show that she believes are more important that the show is doing well. The point of the article was to decry the fact that these other things that she has observed in the show are being ignored in favour of tits by the other members of the audience.

She lists facets of the show which she feels are being overlooked by members of the audience, but I feel are being overlooked by members of the writing staff. The first few episodes are amazing and everything she says they are, but the later episodes are not. That would be like saying that Battlestar Galactica is a brilliant display of how to destroy planets from orbit and anyone who thinks its about a wagon train to the stars clearly misses the point. Its Both and to say it is not, or to say that it is only the audience who is making it one or the other is disingenuous.

But that brings me to my next point. Whether it is the audience doing it (as she clearly believes) or the writing team doing it, it's still bad. It does not matter if it is men or women doing it. Every time I read your posts, Lord Hosk, a voice in the back of my head asks why it matters whether the show is produced by men or women in this discussion, and I think that's what it comes down to.

As I have said repeatedly, I feel that it is the shows creators that have reduced the women to being nothing but a source of hot topless chicks to gawk at.

The only reason I bring up the gender of the creators is because the article clearly puts all the blame on men and based on it starting with the comic she particularly blames Penny-arcade, for making it all about boobs. My point is, which I stated, the article blames men for making the show about boobs, but its not the viewers who make the show about boobs, its the creators, and the creators are not men.

I have watch the show and the praise she heaps on it, is well deserved for the first few episodes. Then the show takes a dramatic turn to being nothing but a source of hot topless chicks gawk at.

I can not put this more clearly than this, Gender doesnt matter to me in this situation other than that the person who wrote the article says in the article men are the problem. If she had said Zebras were the problem I would have countered with "no, humans are". It is not my opinion that she is fixating on men being the problem she says it repeatedly.

for straight dudes to gawk at.

Here is the joke: that guys like looking at boobies more than they like empathising with women.

Here is a fucking exercise for you, geeky straight men of the internet:

That is without including the "you people" thats just the three direct statements of "men are the problem"

[Duckay]

I think you and I are arguing at cross-purposes here. You say that you are not saying that the problem is that she's focusing on men being the problem, but in your very next two sentences you say:

My problem is that she is fixating on the audience being the problem. Specifically the male members of the audience as she puts it.

So, the problem isn't that she is focusing on men being the problem... the problem is that she's fixating on male members of the audience being the problem? I don't honestly see how that's all that different. Especially when you later go on to say:

The only reason I bring up the gender of the creators is because the article clearly puts all the blame on men

That is without including the "you people" thats just the three direct statements of "men are the problem"

The only way I can read this is that you are saying that the problem is that she thinks men are the problem, and is ignoring the woman creators of the show.

If that is what you are saying, then I understand with and agree with your point to an extent (though I still think that by focusing on the gender of either audience or creators, we are missing the greater point that it should be less of a focus, no matter who is doing it). But how can you say that isn't what you're saying, when it seems very clear from your other statements that it is what you're saying?

[Lord Hosk]

The article she wrote is very gender specific it is a more prevalent theme in the article than the show Orange is the new black is. As such it is hard to disagree with her points without also disagreeing with her stance on gender.

to put the gender issue aside entirely.

My problem is that She blames the audience and the reason we are discussing it in this thread is she blames Penny-arcade, I blame the creators of the show.

She says the audience are tossing away all the wonderful things about the show and focusing on boobs. I say that after the first few episodes, the creators tossed everything else out and focused on boobs.

My point is that the show is what she is saying its not in addition to it being what she says it is.

If the show had stopped after those first good episodes she would have a valid point, but it doesnt stop there, it just degrages from a show with

so much else on offer in its portrayal of a wide variety of complex, interesting women – women of colour, transwomen, poor women, criminal women, disabled women, mentally ill women, queer women, immigrant women, religious women, atheist women – with a depth, compassion and, above all, narrative primacy that exists almost nowhere else on television. It’s a clever, well-written, engaging show, and it’s doing something important.

Into the show about Donna from the 70's show, and many other women topless.

[Duckay]

I'm going to have to catch up on recent episodes of the show in order to assess how true I think that is. It may be true.

In any case, I believe that's about audience vs. creators, not men vs. women. Which, yes, I see is what you are saying in your most recent post, but I remain confused about why you focused so heavily on the creators being female in your original post on the subject.

[Bebop Man]

Also, Bebop? Nice.

Solid.

[Lord Hosk]

I'm going to have to catch up on recent episodes of the show in order to assess how true I think that is. It may be true.

In any case, I believe that's about audience vs. creators, not men vs. women. Which, yes, I see is what you are saying in your most recent post, but I remain confused about why you focused so heavily on the creators being female in your original post on the subject.

I focused on the women being creators as a counter point to her focus on men being the problem because of what men focus on.