Age Verification Required

Sorry, we need to confirm you're over 18 before you can view this video.
You should only need to do this once per visit to the website.

How many years old are you?

 

New Tropes vs. Women in Video Games Clip Released

Runtime: 31:43    Author: feministfrequency    Category: Trailers

Anita Sarkeesian, founder of Feminist Frequency, has released the latest episode in her Tropes vs Women in Video Games series, this time looking at women as background decoration. Viewers should be warned, however, that the clip includes some graphic depictions of violence against women.

The 30 minute video looks at the trend of women being placed in minor roles as non-player characters (NPCs) for the sole purpose titillation for an assumed straight male audience, as well as the use of women in advertising for games targeting that same demographic.

Drawing on the work of philosopher Martha Nussbaum, she looks at different elements of objectification - including violability, instrumentality, and the denial of agency - and how these are often reproduced in "non-player sex objects" in games like Grand Theft Auto, Fable, Duke Nukem, and Red Dead Redemption, among many others.

She goes on to look at violence against women in games, and how this is tied to their sexual objectification. She also responds to comments from many about such actions being enacted against male NPCs as well, by pointing out that male NPCs are almost never sexually objectified the way female ones are, and that violence against women, in these cases, is uniquely gendered.

Finally, Sarkeesian looks at the real world impact of such portrayals, drawing on a wealth of sociological and psychological research looking at how objectified images of women in media affect men's attitudes towards women, and women's own self perceptions.



 

Relevant Articles

 

Comments Comments (20)

 
Posted by Koopa18
On Tuesday 17 Jun 2014 3:44 PM
5
Everyone should especially note that she always recognises that you can love and enjoy something and still criticise aspects of it. before the inevitable gun-jumping begins.

This is much better than the NO FEMALE CHARACTERS IN ASSASSIN'S CREED angle. Actually well researched and thought out. The series is worth a watch.
 
 
 
Posted by woollywol
On Tuesday 17 Jun 2014 4:12 PM
4
17 June 2014, 03:44 PM Reply to Koopa18
Everyone should especially note that she always recognises that you can love and enjoy something and still criticise aspects of it. before the inevitable gun-jumping begins.

This is much better than the NO FEMALE CHARACTERS IN ASSASSIN'S CREED angle. Actually well researched and thought out. The series is worth a watch.
I agree with Koopa. You don't have to agree with everything she says to still find her series thought-provoking.
 
 
 
Partos
Posted by Partos
On Tuesday 17 Jun 2014 4:44 PM
2
Excellent points made. In some cases I do think that these sorts of arguments are made up of people forcing facts to agree with a point of view. Arguing that there's strippers in a strip club so this game objectifies women is not a great argument, and I feel that parts of this video were just that or similar arguments. However it's when game mechanics, such as the GTA 5 "don't get caught touching the stripper" minigame, are introduced that issues with objectifying are introduced. I guess the way to gauge whether or not, as players, we are actively objectifying women (or any other group for that matter) is to ask the question "if the game stopped me from doing this action, would it still be a good game and would I still play it?"
 
 
 
SolomonLaw
Posted by SolomonLaw
On Tuesday 17 Jun 2014 5:55 PM
5
Very thought provoking, unfortunately this issue is made worse by the number of parents or guardians who let under 18yo play these games. It's children with developing minds and world views who are most impacted by this. Honestly it scares me the number of sub teens you hear talking about their experiences playing GTA, COD, saints row etc.... And for those who says this doesn't have an impact just remember how u were as a kid after watching rocky, wrestling kungfu movies etc...u would be re-inacting what u saw the next day in the playground with your mates.
 
 
 
Super-Pangolin
Posted by Super-Pangolin
On Tuesday 17 Jun 2014 6:12 PM
7
She has some fantastic videos that are quite eye-opening, and here I agree with her over-arching idea, but by god is she twisting and skewing the reality in some cases with this video. So much of what she had to say I disagree with, it's almost as if she assumes every male going into these games is a mental blank slate who will be shaped by what they experience... rather than knowing better, having a firm grip on reality, and addressing the scenes or actions depicted as being seedy, tragic or just wrong. In the case of children this may be true... but that's an issue with the parents, and not with the content of the game, similar to the "games make people violent" argument.

At about 21 minutes in I even had to replay a sentence referring to violence against these women, because I could have sworn I misheard. "I should note that this kind of misogynistic behavior isn't always mandatory"... it's NEVER been "mandatory" in any game I've ever played. "But it is always implicitly encouraged"... no, it isn't. It got even worse when she claimed "players are meant to derive a perverse pleasure from desecrating the bodies of unsuspecting virtual female characters", which is complete rubbish.

In so many of these cases, whatever can be done to these women can be done to any NPC with the same risk/reward, it's not the developer's desire that we single-out and hunt down these women. They don't want to run the risk of shattering immersion should these events arise - they sell their worlds as seamless and real, but how real would a game feel where every and any adult can be killed, except the women who happen to be sexualised? If a player does engage in this behavior then they're satisfying some deep, sick fantasy - it's not an encouraged, inherent or celebrated part of the gameplay experience in most cases.
 
 
 
Posted by Gonzala
On Tuesday 17 Jun 2014 8:04 PM
2
Unfortunately this type of female portrayal sells the games. The only issue is that they are getting more violent and sexualised.... television is trending in the same direction. The games are not designed to played in front of a family audience, especially younger members of society. I think the game designers need to step back and stop crossing the line - most of us don't need this content to enjoy the gaming experience.
 
 
 
Posted by LukeB
On Tuesday 17 Jun 2014 8:32 PM
5
***This is long, so please don't quote or comment on what I've said unless you've read the entire piece***

The objectification of any person; male or female, isn't something that I particularly enjoy, but it does create a story and an experience... and at the end of the day, that's what game creators are trying to do, and the closer we get to the uncanny value of a replica of a living, breathing world, the more options like these the player will encounter. At the end of the day, a game has no real world ramifications (other than the possible psychological ones if not guided by proper home and school education) and therefore some people will partake in any given option, just because it's there, but that shouldn't mean that creators should restrict themselves or their creations.

Like most of these sorts of pieces, I don't see the point in them. If you want to explore sex and sexuality in a game, then either play a game that allows for that, or make that title yourself. In the same way as a women doesn't owe a man anything when he approaches her, a developer doesn't owe you anything other than to tell the story they want to tell. Many amazing titles offer real, emotional sexual relationships in healthy ways, the thing is, the ones that do this the best tend to make this an optional side activity while also incorporating all manner of other activities to stimulate the sexual desires/ fantasies of the player/ player character.

The idea that games promote the heterosexual male dominance in society isn't entirely wrong however. Most titles do. The issue seems to be that those are the titles that sell, and therefore more titles of a similar nature are created because Gaming is still an industry run on profits; we just happen to live in a world where sex sells... or more to the point, heterosexual sex (in a violent game) sells.

I disagree with the premise of this argument/ course of discussion based on the premise that a consumer shouldn't dictate what a creator is and is not allowed to place in their experiences. In most of the cases listed above, it's the player character's choice to interact with the "sex objects" in any given gaming environment and in the cases where it is not an option, it is usually a part of the story; whether it is to elicit some for of admiration or distaste for a character/location or be a way to retain a historical/cultural aspect. Honestly, I have put 60+ hours into GTAV and not once did I realize that you could fondle a stripper to the point where you could take her back to your place, but the fact that that is in there and didn't take away or add anything to MY experience is amazing. Depth and player choice is important, especially in a title like GTA, a world that is designed to showcase the worst humanity has to offer in a satirical experience to better engage the audience in order to show/subtly teach the player about the hypercritical duality of our real world.

The subject of violence against women in a video game seems mute to me, every game objectifies men, their lust for power and then has you strangling, shooting, torturing, stabbing, ripping apart, ripping off, blowing up and in general mass murdering or using those men to further the plot, but place a women in danger and suddenly it's exploitative; it fundamentally goes against the very nature of equality. Many of the issues she (the host) seems to have are a strong part of any game itself, the fact that she is focusing on only women is incredibly hypocritical seeing as in the games you can do these acts you can do far worse to the objectified male npcs. When Ms. Sarkeesian (the host) brings up the idea that these objectified women have no usefulness outside their given sexual nature, I don't 100% disagree, but I do question her ability at looking at these full and realized worlds as intractable simulations. Not including these options would also be a dis-service to the world the developers are trying to create. Perhaps they could include a few more male or other optional sexually exploitative npcs, but as she says, that's not the point of this rant nor is it exactly wanted, it's more about general objectification of women. The fact that she out right says that men are "never" portrayed in that light and then gives examples of how men are in fact portrayed this way AND in many of the titles that she used as examples for the objectification of women just goes to show how closed minded her argument is. She says that men aren't reduced to the base premise of their sexuality, but I disagree entirely. Men are depicted as domineering heterosexual action studs with pockets full of cash and all the right words to sway any women or sexual object he/the player sees fit, this is itself objectification and generally the player is then forced by circ*mstance to mass murder hundreds if not thousands of people, all because the game tells you too, but also for the pleasure of the player themselves (otherwise, why did they even bother picking up the title?), it's just that most men don't have an issue with it and therefore it is deemed irrelevant to the discussion; which it should most definitely not be. Just like the option of objectifying women in games is present in some (if not most) games, shouldn't reduce the fact that men are in general, hyper sexualized in almost every game; the difference is that you typically ARE that person.

The game "Enslaved" is a perfect example of a women objectifying the player character entirely. The male, player controlled character's life is actually tied directly into the life of his female slaver. She tells him what to do, or his life is put at risk... it's the very premise of the game. Yes, titles like Enslaved are few and far between, but they do exist.

The real issue is that society in general objectifies women; this includes women themselves. Games are merely mimicking life, and the situations depicted in gaming environments/stories tend to be the more extreme examples/cases, hence the excessive amount of violence, gore and yes, sex and/or the objectification of women. Just because you don't actively look for it in your real world environments doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Almost every city has multiple brothels (especially in NZ now that it is legal/taxable) and be it an average day on the streets or a single night on the town; even in the chilly South Island of NZ, women will be wandering around in tight, short dresses and low-cut tops, that's life. Not every women mind you, but it's the same in video games too, not EVERY women is objectified, Ms. Sarkeesian just happens to be using them as an example. The real world ramifications upon society, how boys/men view/interact with women and more importantly what women do to themselves both mentally and physically as a result of games is more an issue with a lack of proper education and should not be up to the game industry to create a solution for.

For this to become less of an issue, game developers need to hire writers that can expose the grit, grim and sexual nature of the real world in the titles/stories they are crafting without objectifying ANY sort of human, now I'm not the person to do this, but I do ask whether that is the sort of game we are really wanting? Finally, as I said at the start and as always, if you don't like these aspects of the games you are playing, either make high quality titles yourself or vote with your wallet, but please don't restrict creators from telling the stories they want to tell, in the way the choose to tell it; it's not their fault that sex sells.

Instead of saying what people shouldn't do, focus instead on what they should do; focusing on the negative elements only does yourself damage and doesn't help solve the issue you really have. Positive actions beget positive actions. If you want to change the world, promote and teach proper edict in schools in a fun and interesting way and leave the game developers, book writers, movie&tv producers/ directors/writers and general storytellers alone to tell the stories they wish to tell in the manner in which they want; with proper and reinforced education, all things sort themselves out.
 
 
 
Posted by drunk_monk
On Tuesday 17 Jun 2014 11:02 PM
3
The message is solid and I agree BUT I disagree with nearly everything she says. She takes some huge leaps and takes alot out of context. Some of my biggest issues are:

The sales of games back in the days. Were the games the only things sold this way? The issue isn't with games specifically.

Complaining about women being strippers in stripclubs is dumb, and strip clubs are a part of the gang scene. Hence them in gang based games.

The Hitman absolution example is really twisted. You can do the same with dead men and the guards react the same.

The pimps and hoes examples are terrible as that happens in real life. the fact that this reflects reality isn't taken into consideration.

And the sleeping dogs example is terrible, comparing women to vending machines is disgraceful. This should compare the women, to vending machine, to gun salesman, to car salesman. All supply the character with some resource function within the gamespace.

The killing of women being an.issue is terrible as alot of those examples in those games you can do it with men too.

The foreign prostitutes example is terrible as when I was in Thailand it was EXACTLY like that with prostitutes on the street asking you to come in with broken English.

To make her happy it seems like you can't use women accurately, you can't use them in accurate scenarios, or treat them the same as men. Basically just not use women in games.

This would be better to show where games were with women, how far it's come and how much further it should go.
 
 
 
Posted by Deanology
On Tuesday 17 Jun 2014 11:44 PM
1
In all fairness, this is kinda clutching at straws for feminism..
I do agree with a lot that she says, though...

It is impractical to make NPCs deep and (to some degree) human.
Sure, I would love playing a large game in which every NPC had a life that you could explore and empathise with, but I don't think developers have the time or budget to do so.

I get that this is not a dig at players, but more the industry, and how women in general are objectified. It is a shame that it has been going on so long that it is just seen as normal.

Small steps, but eventually, everything will be evened out.
 
 
 
Posted by Chris Redfield
On Wednesday 18 Jun 2014 12:12 AM
2
Holy sh*t there's a lot of games with brothels and skin bars now.
 
 
 
Posted by Chris Redfield
On Wednesday 18 Jun 2014 12:44 AM
4
Great video. Whilst she makes some jumps in logic, overall her points are spot on. There seriously is waaaaaaaaaaaaay too much objectification and most of her examples I did find pretty repugnant on closer inspection. They wouldn't be so bad if games actually reflected on the objectification they portray, but for the most part games are just like "Hey man check out these hos!".

Too bad most gamers tend to get all defensive and create bullsh*t arguments against her.
 
 
 
oconnomiyaki
Posted by oconnomiyaki
On Wednesday 18 Jun 2014 11:19 AM
8
18 June 2014, 12:44 AM Reply to Chris Redfield
Great video. Whilst she makes some jumps in logic, overall her points are spot on. There seriously is waaaaaaaaaaaaay too much objectification and most of her examples I did find pretty repugnant on closer inspection. They wouldn't be so bad if games actually reflected on the objectification they portray, but for the most part games are just like "Hey man check out these hos!".

Too bad most gamers tend to get all defensive and create bullsh*t arguments against her.
The problem is that video games in general are pretty repugnant and reprehensible. Take this Assassin's Creed drama. Everyone's focused on whether or not there's a female in the game, but everyone is absolutely fine with the fact that the series is basically a premeditated murder simulator. If we argue that sexism in games is a problem because it influences and reinforces, then we cannot dismiss these arguments about violence. But so many are prepared to do so.

It's not so much that Sarkeesian needs to address this in the video, so much that in general highlighting only one aspect does suggest that it's the only problem or the biggest problem. It's really a case of "Well, hey, aren't video games really just the bastion of all that's disgusting in life?"

There are of course, exceptions. Tetris is a good example. But if you look at what's making its way into the Top 10 and what's getting the high review scores on Metacritic...
 
 
 
Posted by Durty Driscoll
On Wednesday 18 Jun 2014 11:24 AM
5
What I find interesting is a game like Red Dead. In essence, it's a game designed around the tropes you'd find in westerns, especially spaghetti westerns from the 60s and 70s, Spaghetti Westerns were famous for exaggerating violence and over sexualising life in the 1880s. However, life was still generally different to how we live now, especially attitudes towards women, society was on the cusp of suffrage and feminism. Do we blame the developer for the portrayal of women in the game, or the directors of those 60s or 70s films, or society as it was in 1890?
 
 
 
Posted by Chris Redfield
On Wednesday 18 Jun 2014 12:25 PM
6
18 June 2014, 11:19 AM Reply to oconnomiyaki
The problem is that video games in general are pretty repugnant and reprehensible. Take this Assassin's Creed drama. Everyone's focused on whether or not there's a female in the game, but everyone is absolutely fine with the fact that the series is basically a premeditated murder simulator. If we argue that sexism in games is a problem because it influences and reinforces, then we cannot dismiss these arguments about violence. But so many are prepared to do so.

It's not so much that Sarkeesian needs to address this in the video, so much that in general highlighting only one aspect does suggest that it's the only problem or the biggest problem. It's really a case of "Well, hey, aren't video games really just the bastion of all that's disgusting in life?"

There are of course, exceptions. Tetris is a good example. But if you look at what's making its way into the Top 10 and what's getting the high review scores on Metacritic...
I agree that there does need to be more discussion surrounding violence and general immorality in video games but I disagree that Sarkeesian is somehow taking away from that debate by focussing on one specific issue. Her whole series is focussed on depictions of females in games because that is her modus operandi- Analysing females in pop culture narratives. Just because she puts the spotlight on this issue I don't see how this is diminishing other issues with games just because she doesn't talk about them? I find it a bit of a leap to suggest that this discussion is making it seem like the only issue.

I mean I have lots of issues with video games (Despite still consuming and enjoying them). One of my biggest gripes over the past little while has been the glorification of war and US jingoism. But just because Sarkessian doesn't mention that doesn't mean I find the issue somehow relegated to less important (Although there seems to be almost no discussion of it but meh).

Also I'm inclined to argue that the objectification and marginalisation of females in video games IS the biggest issue in the industry. The way females are represented in the medium is seriously behind the times and only helps to re-enforce damaging attitudes in regards to gender that have plagued our society since man first figured out his muscles were bigger than his mothers. Things like the casual attitudes to violence or straight up murder in video games are an issue, but I feel that the real world consequences of these issues are minor in comparison to the ones that arise from the depiction of females. We still live in a society with rape culture, sl*t-shaming, sexual harassment, sexual discrimination etc etc. And the sexualised nature of women in these games can only help to fortify this culture.
 
 
 
Super-Pangolin
Posted by Super-Pangolin
On Wednesday 18 Jun 2014 3:46 PM
2
The issue with her examples is that in many of these games, women aren't JUST sexualised as objects of desire - I know for a fact that in Sleeping Dogs and the Fallout games (and to a degree, Saints Row) there are women important to the narrative that are powerful, strong-willed, dignified and intelligent, who command respect.

So, correct me if I'm wrong, but her point then becomes that it's wrong for there to be female prostitutes and strippers in those games, and also that the game doesn't forcibly and actively prevent you from brutalizing them in the exact same way you could anybody else in these worlds? Because strippers and prostitutes do exist, particularly in realms where crime is involved - and (although things like sex trafficking & rape cause uncertainty) on the surface these two occupations are the result of an individual willingly consenting their services for payment, not being a victim.

I can definitely see the issue with games that don't depict women in a positive light as strong, pivotal characters, as without them it does go out of balance and feel misogynistic. But developers are trying to sell us a believable world, and so they mirror the reality of ours, complete with its seedy sex industry - as sad a fact as that may be. When sex is such an large part of the real life subject matter many of these games tackle, it wouldn't make sense to omit this side entirely, developers just need to take care they keep the balance - Bethesda and Bioware certainly do fair jobs of this.

Also funny how she used Fallout New Vegas as an example of having a lack of consequence when killing a prostitute... been a couple years since I played, but as far as I can remember when you shoot an innocent in a town, doesn't the entire armed population initiate a manhunt and come after you?
 
 
 
oconnomiyaki
Posted by oconnomiyaki
On Wednesday 18 Jun 2014 3:53 PM
5
18 June 2014, 12:25 PM Reply to Chris Redfield
I agree that there does need to be more discussion surrounding violence and general immorality in video games but I disagree that Sarkeesian is somehow taking away from that debate by focussing on one specific issue. Her whole series is focussed on depictions of females in games because that is her modus operandi- Analysing females in pop culture narratives. Just because she puts the spotlight on this issue I don't see how this is diminishing other issues with games just because she doesn't talk about them? I find it a bit of a leap to suggest that this discussion is making it seem like the only issue.

I mean I have lots of issues with video games (Despite still consuming and enjoying them). One of my biggest gripes over the past little while has been the glorification of war and US jingoism. But just because Sarkessian doesn't mention that doesn't mean I find the issue somehow relegated to less important (Although there seems to be almost no discussion of it but meh).

Also I'm inclined to argue that the objectification and marginalisation of females in video games IS the biggest issue in the industry. The way females are represented in the medium is seriously behind the times and only helps to re-enforce damaging attitudes in regards to gender that have plagued our society since man first figured out his muscles were bigger than his mothers. Things like the casual attitudes to violence or straight up murder in video games are an issue, but I feel that the real world consequences of these issues are minor in comparison to the ones that arise from the depiction of females. We still live in a society with rape culture, sl*t-shaming, sexual harassment, sexual discrimination etc etc. And the sexualised nature of women in these games can only help to fortify this culture.
Naturally, Sarkeesian is only going to focus on feminist issues because that's her agenda. It's not so much Sarkeesian as the community at large. Sarkeesian is one critic, one voice. But there is a sizeable and vocal part of the community that has latched onto her and her cause and almost demanded that it be acknowledged as an issue. Meanwhile, whenever criticism is made about the violence in video games -- or even the jingoism, for example ;) -- it gets dismissed with comments such as "It's not real," or "It's only pixels on a screen." My question isn't why are people speaking up about sexism and representation of minorities in general in games, but why is *no one* standing up to speak up against the sheer amount of violence, often at the extreme end, that serves as the foundation for the medium? That's what leads to the assumption that perhaps these groups see it as the only issue, or the only one worth discussing. I disagree, and always will. It's important, but not nearly as important as the possible subconscious conditioning around violence that is going on -- the same kind of subconscious conditioning people are worried about reinforcing archaic gender roles based on representation in games.

People have always treated each other like sh*t, but it's becoming increasingly easy to do so. It starts off with that person you're shooting being "just a collection of pixels." Then there's a person behind that collection of pixels (multiplayer), but it's not really much of a jump. There's a bit of voice there, so what? So it's easy to tell that person you f**ked their mother and they should go kill themselves -- all without giving a second thought to how that will actually impact the person on the other side of the screen. So you're getting points for your headshots ("Boom!") and you're whittling away your empathy and you've got to wonder where it all ends.

Again, I'm not concerned that people are addressing the issue of sexism at all. I'm concerned that they are giving it such prominence. I'm less concerned that Princess Peach is a grail object in a quest romance and far more concerned that even the family-friendly Mario preaches that the answer to all problems is to beat the sh*t out of everything that gets in your way.
 
 
 
Posted by jamesg
On Wednesday 18 Jun 2014 7:23 PM
-1
As much as I would like to stay away from the conversation not because I have nothing of relevance or something to counter-argue to say, but because this woman is only seeking to spread her false ideals.

There is no other way say this but Anita Sarkeesian is not a real gamer. I'm not saying this to discredit her, she discredits herself in a video released last year, dated 2010 in which she is making a presentation at the Santa Monica College, she states "I am not a fan of video games, I actually had to learn a lot of video games while in the process". It has also been discovered that most of her footage in the videos is actually taken from long plays, in other words she did not use the kick-starter money to buy video games so she could capture said footage, but she stole it.

Enough is enough this woman is con artist while there may be arguments about sexism in video games she is not the person to go to to discuss this "issue".
 
 
 
Super-Pangolin
Posted by Super-Pangolin
On Thursday 19 Jun 2014 7:29 AM
2
18 June 2014, 07:23 PM Reply to jamesg
As much as I would like to stay away from the conversation not because I have nothing of relevance or something to counter-argue to say, but because this woman is only seeking to spread her false ideals.

There is no other way say this but Anita Sarkeesian is not a real gamer. I'm not saying this to discredit her, she discredits herself in a video released last year, dated 2010 in which she is making a presentation at the Santa Monica College, she states "I am not a fan of video games, I actually had to learn a lot of video games while in the process". It has also been discovered that most of her footage in the videos is actually taken from long plays, in other words she did not use the kick-starter money to buy video games so she could capture said footage, but she stole it.

Enough is enough this woman is con artist while there may be arguments about sexism in video games she is not the person to go to to discuss this "issue".
I thought something seemed off about her approach to SOME of these games - it did seem like she was abstracting the reality of them in a way that indicated A) she'd never played them, or B) she was trying to misinform people who haven't played them.

It's a good job I have played some and know better, or I'd be out picketing and organising game-burning rallies. It's a shame a good point with an issue that DOES exist has been undermined by an unwillingness to properly research the subject matter of the games.
 
 
 
Posted by drunk_monk
On Thursday 19 Jun 2014 1:10 PM
-
19 June 2014, 07:29 AM Reply to Super-Pangolin
I thought something seemed off about her approach to SOME of these games - it did seem like she was abstracting the reality of them in a way that indicated A) she'd never played them, or B) she was trying to misinform people who haven't played them.

It's a good job I have played some and know better, or I'd be out picketing and organising game-burning rallies. It's a shame a good point with an issue that DOES exist has been undermined by an unwillingness to properly research the subject matter of the games.
I wanted to see if people were having proper conversation about the way she uses things out of context to push her point.

She disabled the comments, sure there would be a bunch of sexist garbage but she doesnt want feedback about how misguided her videos are.

Your right Super-Pangolin, to someone without knowledge or context of these scenes this would look appauling, and unfortunately people are viewing it without context.
 
 
 
whataboutki
Posted by whataboutki
On Thursday 19 Jun 2014 5:22 PM
-
I love her videos, definitely makes me think more about the games I'm playing.