Scan barcode
amber_lea84's reviews
789 reviews
Juicing Recipes From Fitlife.TV Star Drew Canole For Vitality and Health by Drew Canole
2.0
This book could easily be chopped down to pamphlet size. Some of his juicing recipes are ONE thing. Dude, three apples...that's just apple juice, clown. It would make more sense if he was like, "Here are the fifteen or so things I like to use...here's what each one is good for. This is what works together and these are the combinations you should probably avoid." Instead it's like 90 super basic combinations. Most of them are just two or three things, and each one has nearly the same directions. Yes, peel them if they're not organic, I get it. You really didn't need to put that in there 90 times.
Before you dive into this book, let me share some of my favorite quotes:
"Many vegetables take on the shape and from of what they are good for in the body. If you look at celery, it looks like your bones."
Good thing you included that disclaimer about not being a medical professional.
"Worried about losing your hair? Ever notice how alfalfa sprouts look surprisingly like hair follicles?"
...let me guess...
"When you are done drinking this juice, you will look like you dunked your abs in a bucket of knives. Not really, but you get my point."
I'm not sure that I do.
I read this because it was free through the amazon prime lending library. I gave it two stars because it's hilariously bad, and it did give me some ideas. But this book isn't worth paying for. You'll get better information from a google search.
Before you dive into this book, let me share some of my favorite quotes:
"Many vegetables take on the shape and from of what they are good for in the body. If you look at celery, it looks like your bones."
Good thing you included that disclaimer about not being a medical professional.
"Worried about losing your hair? Ever notice how alfalfa sprouts look surprisingly like hair follicles?"
...let me guess...
"When you are done drinking this juice, you will look like you dunked your abs in a bucket of knives. Not really, but you get my point."
I'm not sure that I do.
I read this because it was free through the amazon prime lending library. I gave it two stars because it's hilariously bad, and it did give me some ideas. But this book isn't worth paying for. You'll get better information from a google search.
The Phantom Tollbooth by Norton Juster
3.0
So about 14 years ago a friend told me this was one of the best books he ever read and I immediately ran out and bought a copy.
This is my thing. When I like someone, I ask them their favorite books and then I immediately buy those books and squirrel them away. My room is full of everyone's favorite books, and I've only read about 1/3 of them. It's a problem?
Anyway, I finally read this one, and it's about a kid who's depressed, and then he comes home from school to find a box with a tollbooth inside and some instructions on how to use it. He goes on a ridiculous journey to an imaginary place where barely anything makes sense and in the end (spoiler alert?) he learns to find joy in the little things and life doesn't seem quite so dull.
Honestly, it's a little too whimsical and silly for me, and I felt like it could have been even more clever (I wanted the jokes to be more like, "haha, we're making fun of real things people do that don't make sense" and less "haha, we're taking things very literally and stretching our imaginations to the limit"), but it's still a unique book with funny jokes and a good message so I don't want to be too hard on it.
Also, I always appreciate a good jump to conclusions joke.
This is my thing. When I like someone, I ask them their favorite books and then I immediately buy those books and squirrel them away. My room is full of everyone's favorite books, and I've only read about 1/3 of them. It's a problem?
Anyway, I finally read this one, and it's about a kid who's depressed, and then he comes home from school to find a box with a tollbooth inside and some instructions on how to use it. He goes on a ridiculous journey to an imaginary place where barely anything makes sense and in the end (spoiler alert?) he learns to find joy in the little things and life doesn't seem quite so dull.
Honestly, it's a little too whimsical and silly for me, and I felt like it could have been even more clever (I wanted the jokes to be more like, "haha, we're making fun of real things people do that don't make sense" and less "haha, we're taking things very literally and stretching our imaginations to the limit"), but it's still a unique book with funny jokes and a good message so I don't want to be too hard on it.
Also, I always appreciate a good jump to conclusions joke.
Shakespeare: The World as Stage by Bill Bryson
4.0
So I don't care about Shakespeare, at all. I also don't care about theater or poetry.
But I am interested in the question "What can you possibly know about a person who lived in the 1500s?" which is something this book explores.
This book is thoroughly interesting and a really quick read.
But I am interested in the question "What can you possibly know about a person who lived in the 1500s?" which is something this book explores.
This book is thoroughly interesting and a really quick read.
Gut: The Inside Story of Our Body's Most Underrated Organ by Giulia Enders
4.0
I went into this book knowing almost nothing about how the digestive system works, so I learned A LOT. I picked this book because I was especially interested in learning about gut bacteria and probiotics (and the so-called "second brain" in our gut) and this book did not disappoint.
I had a hard time deciding if I should give it four or five stars because I know so little that it's hard for me judge how accurate this information is. But the author says this field is so new that's it's hard for even her to know if what she's saying is correct.
I felt like some of the jokes and metaphors were super weird but she's German and I'm American, so that might explain it. I did appreciate the conversational tone and a majority of the jokes and metaphors worked.
I had a hard time deciding if I should give it four or five stars because I know so little that it's hard for me judge how accurate this information is. But the author says this field is so new that's it's hard for even her to know if what she's saying is correct.
I felt like some of the jokes and metaphors were super weird but she's German and I'm American, so that might explain it. I did appreciate the conversational tone and a majority of the jokes and metaphors worked.
What Doctors Feel: How Emotions Affect the Practice of Medicine by Danielle Ofri
5.0
I read this book to try to understand some of the interactions I've had with doctors and why they went the way they did. I wanted to have more empathy for why doctors sometimes seem a bit moody or erratic and to understand why I sometimes feel like I can't win no matter what I do. Basically, I wanted to know if there was something I could do differently, or some way I could read the situation differently to get better results.
I think this book is a must read for anyone with a chronic illness or who for any reason has to deal with doctors on a regular basis. I feel like this book did a lot to help me understand what it's like to be a doctor, which has definitely helped me understand how to better interact with doctors. While we all know that doctors are busy people who often have an inhuman amount of work to do, I feel like this book gave me a much clearer picture of what they go through every day. I feel better able to deal with doctors who seem frustrated because I see them as people who maybe need my help and not adversaries who are upset with me in particular. I definitely feel empowered to have more meaningful interactions with doctors after reading this book.
I think this book is a must read for anyone with a chronic illness or who for any reason has to deal with doctors on a regular basis. I feel like this book did a lot to help me understand what it's like to be a doctor, which has definitely helped me understand how to better interact with doctors. While we all know that doctors are busy people who often have an inhuman amount of work to do, I feel like this book gave me a much clearer picture of what they go through every day. I feel better able to deal with doctors who seem frustrated because I see them as people who maybe need my help and not adversaries who are upset with me in particular. I definitely feel empowered to have more meaningful interactions with doctors after reading this book.
A Sucky Love Story: Overcoming Unhappily Ever After by Brittani Louise Taylor
4.0
I had no idea who Brittani Louise Taylor was before I saw her on youtube talking about nearly getting kidnapped into human trafficking by her fiance.
I watched kind of a lot of Brittani's videos while I waited for this book to come in and I found some of her videos kind of scattered and rambly. On top of that, I was annoyed that most new videos were a kickbaity advertisement for this book. So my impression of Brittani wasn’t the best going in. I also noticed this book wasn't getting good reviews. As a result, my expectations were low.
But having read it, I agree with a lot of the positive things I've heard. I read this book almost entirely in one sitting, and I didn't find Brittani nearly as scattered and rambly in print as I did in her videos. She does write like she talks, but I think it works. I don't know why people (her fans?) are trashing her writing. I was expecting to be really put off by it and I wasn't. It feels a lot like sitting there while your friend tells you a crazy story. Sometimes her attempts to be cute are cringy, but that's Brittani man. She's mildly annoying, but in an endearing way. That is her whole shtick: She's a dork.
If you're expecting something other than Brittani Louise Taylor being herself you're gonna have a bad time. I feel confused by the fact that anyone would expect anything else.
Writing aside, this book isn't perfect. There are definitely some minor inconsistencies, but I imagine that's because Brittani can only guess at what Milos's motivations were and she’s still processing everything. She and her mom were also weirdly generous toward Milos. They're both positive and upbeat to a fault. And she seemingly glossed over some things. Like the part where she packed up all Milos's stuff and tried to kick him out felt a bit odd because she had been saying so many positive things about him up until that point. I got the impression she saw unsavory things in him before that but didn’t mention them.
But sharing such a messy story isn't easy. How do you even tell a story like this? I think she did her best. It’s not an objective account. It’s her account, told in her voice, as she was seeing it at the time that she wrote it. It might be helpful to look at it as a window into the mind of someone going through a really bad time and trying to sort it out as best she can. She's not writing about it 10 years later. This just happened. It's probably still happening. It takes years and years to really process something like this. It sucks that people are taking away, “She’s so immature” or “She didn’t seem to learn much from this.” She’s clearly a little behind the average person when it comes to certain life experiences, but I love her for being honest about things that are embarrassing. It’s easy to present yourself as more knowledgeable in hindsight to protect your ego/image and she doesn’t do that. I think that’s admirable. She’s like, “I was naive, LEARN from me.” She is exactly the kind of person who gets targeted by people like Milos. To be like, “err, she’s dumb” is to miss the point.
Also, the fact that people are getting all butthurt about her "slut shaming" is just...whatever. She's giving us a window into her head space. I don't think she should be shamed for being a prude or immature because it gives us insight into how she ended up here, but the wrongthink crowd is all over it. I wish these people could take a break from needing everyone to be their personal role model.
Also, people are saying that they're disappointed that she got so upset that Milos was looking at porn, but it wasn't just looking at porn...he was interacting with cam girls while he said he was studying. Brittani was killing herself trying to take care of the baby and supporting them both, and he kept yelling at her about how hard he was studying. If your take away is, "oh my god, she's so regressive, yay 4 porn"...wut. My take away wasn't that Brittani cares if YOU look at porn - maybe she does, maybe she doesn't - it's that she cared that Milos was secretly looking at porn. To her it was cheating, and also, no matter how to look at it, he was lying.
I also think the contrast of the book cover and the subject matter fits with Brittani’s personality. She could have easily made a much more serious and somber book cover, but that would feel even weirder. She is tragically upbeat. She tries so hard to be positive throughout this entire book. I think relentless positivity is obviously her coping mechanism.
Anyway, my biggest disappointment with this book is that I didn't get the answers I was looking for. She pretty much said it all, and maybe more, when she talked to Shane. I thought I was going to learn something about why the FBI was looking into Milos, but the FBI never enters into it. I'm guessing because all that happened after the book was written, or maybe she wasn't allowed to talk about it, but either way, there's nothing about it here. So you shouldn't go into it expecting to learn more if you saw Shane's video, but I think it’s still worth reading.
I watched kind of a lot of Brittani's videos while I waited for this book to come in and I found some of her videos kind of scattered and rambly. On top of that, I was annoyed that most new videos were a kickbaity advertisement for this book. So my impression of Brittani wasn’t the best going in. I also noticed this book wasn't getting good reviews. As a result, my expectations were low.
But having read it, I agree with a lot of the positive things I've heard. I read this book almost entirely in one sitting, and I didn't find Brittani nearly as scattered and rambly in print as I did in her videos. She does write like she talks, but I think it works. I don't know why people (her fans?) are trashing her writing. I was expecting to be really put off by it and I wasn't. It feels a lot like sitting there while your friend tells you a crazy story. Sometimes her attempts to be cute are cringy, but that's Brittani man. She's mildly annoying, but in an endearing way. That is her whole shtick: She's a dork.
If you're expecting something other than Brittani Louise Taylor being herself you're gonna have a bad time. I feel confused by the fact that anyone would expect anything else.
Writing aside, this book isn't perfect. There are definitely some minor inconsistencies, but I imagine that's because Brittani can only guess at what Milos's motivations were and she’s still processing everything. She and her mom were also weirdly generous toward Milos. They're both positive and upbeat to a fault. And she seemingly glossed over some things. Like the part where she packed up all Milos's stuff and tried to kick him out felt a bit odd because she had been saying so many positive things about him up until that point. I got the impression she saw unsavory things in him before that but didn’t mention them.
But sharing such a messy story isn't easy. How do you even tell a story like this? I think she did her best. It’s not an objective account. It’s her account, told in her voice, as she was seeing it at the time that she wrote it. It might be helpful to look at it as a window into the mind of someone going through a really bad time and trying to sort it out as best she can. She's not writing about it 10 years later. This just happened. It's probably still happening. It takes years and years to really process something like this. It sucks that people are taking away, “She’s so immature” or “She didn’t seem to learn much from this.” She’s clearly a little behind the average person when it comes to certain life experiences, but I love her for being honest about things that are embarrassing. It’s easy to present yourself as more knowledgeable in hindsight to protect your ego/image and she doesn’t do that. I think that’s admirable. She’s like, “I was naive, LEARN from me.” She is exactly the kind of person who gets targeted by people like Milos. To be like, “err, she’s dumb” is to miss the point.
Also, the fact that people are getting all butthurt about her "slut shaming" is just...whatever. She's giving us a window into her head space. I don't think she should be shamed for being a prude or immature because it gives us insight into how she ended up here, but the wrongthink crowd is all over it. I wish these people could take a break from needing everyone to be their personal role model.
Spoiler
It's crazy to me that anyone would think, "I feel judged by a 30 year old virgin." Oh, okay.Also, people are saying that they're disappointed that she got so upset that Milos was looking at porn, but it wasn't just looking at porn...he was interacting with cam girls while he said he was studying. Brittani was killing herself trying to take care of the baby and supporting them both, and he kept yelling at her about how hard he was studying. If your take away is, "oh my god, she's so regressive, yay 4 porn"...wut. My take away wasn't that Brittani cares if YOU look at porn - maybe she does, maybe she doesn't - it's that she cared that Milos was secretly looking at porn. To her it was cheating, and also, no matter how to look at it, he was lying.
I also think the contrast of the book cover and the subject matter fits with Brittani’s personality. She could have easily made a much more serious and somber book cover, but that would feel even weirder. She is tragically upbeat. She tries so hard to be positive throughout this entire book. I think relentless positivity is obviously her coping mechanism.
Anyway, my biggest disappointment with this book is that I didn't get the answers I was looking for. She pretty much said it all, and maybe more, when she talked to Shane. I thought I was going to learn something about why the FBI was looking into Milos, but the FBI never enters into it. I'm guessing because all that happened after the book was written, or maybe she wasn't allowed to talk about it, but either way, there's nothing about it here. So you shouldn't go into it expecting to learn more if you saw Shane's video, but I think it’s still worth reading.
The United States of Absurdity: Untold Stories from American History by Dave Anthony, Gareth Reynolds
3.0
I hope you like bad puns.
This is one of those books that's kind of hard to rate because it's dumb and entertaining. I actually thought a few things in this book were bullshit, but I googled them and I stand corrected.
I think my biggest complaint about this book is the brevity. I think each of these stories could have easily been twice as long. There were times where they would state something ridiculous and then immediately move on leaving me going, "Wait...what? No, what? Go back. Elaborate. There is way more story there."
This is one of those books that's kind of hard to rate because it's dumb and entertaining. I actually thought a few things in this book were bullshit, but I googled them and I stand corrected.
I think my biggest complaint about this book is the brevity. I think each of these stories could have easily been twice as long. There were times where they would state something ridiculous and then immediately move on leaving me going, "Wait...what? No, what? Go back. Elaborate. There is way more story there."
The Small Big: Small Changes That Spark Big Influence by Steve J. Martin, Noah J. Goldstein, Robert B. Cialdini
3.0
I like reading books about persuasion to help me be more conscious of the ways advertisers and politicians manipulate people. To that end, this book didn't have much new information.
But something I really liked about this book was that it heavily focused on how to get people to do things that are good for them or the greater good. It wasn't all business all the time. There were even tips in here on how to trick yourself into doing things that are good for you that you're likely inclined to avoid.
While I think this book is decent, I would definitely recommending reading Influence instead, and if you've read Influence there's not much reason to read this. I only read it because the audiobook was on hoopla.
But something I really liked about this book was that it heavily focused on how to get people to do things that are good for them or the greater good. It wasn't all business all the time. There were even tips in here on how to trick yourself into doing things that are good for you that you're likely inclined to avoid.
While I think this book is decent, I would definitely recommending reading Influence instead, and if you've read Influence there's not much reason to read this. I only read it because the audiobook was on hoopla.
Goodbye, Columbus by Philip Roth
2.0
I was really disappointed by this book.
Philip Roth is one of those authors where he's so highly regarded by so many people that to say I don't get it feels like I'm announcing to the world that I'm an idiot, but I don't get it.
I felt depressed by how thoroughly mediocre every character is. It's like a relentless onslaught of mediocrity. I don't know how else to describe it.
The best thing I can say is occasionally his descriptions made me stop and go, "Wow, that is excellent writing."
I really need help to understand what other people are seeing here. Most reviews are just like, "Philip Roth: such genius." Do I need historical context? Cultural context? I live in New Jersey so it's not a Jersey thing. I understand what satire is, but am I missing what exactly is being made fun of here?
Throw me a line.
Philip Roth is one of those authors where he's so highly regarded by so many people that to say I don't get it feels like I'm announcing to the world that I'm an idiot, but I don't get it.
I felt depressed by how thoroughly mediocre every character is. It's like a relentless onslaught of mediocrity. I don't know how else to describe it.
The best thing I can say is occasionally his descriptions made me stop and go, "Wow, that is excellent writing."
I really need help to understand what other people are seeing here. Most reviews are just like, "Philip Roth: such genius." Do I need historical context? Cultural context? I live in New Jersey so it's not a Jersey thing. I understand what satire is, but am I missing what exactly is being made fun of here?
Throw me a line.
The State of Play: Creators and Critics on Video Game Culture by Katherine Cross, Cara Ellison, William Knoblauch, Linus Larsson, Ian Bogost, Zoë Quinn, Anita Sarkeesian, Ian Shanahan, Dan Golding, Evan Narcisse, Leigh Alexander, Hussein Ibrahim, Anna Anthropy, David Johnston, Merritt Kopas, Ola Wikander, Daniel Goldberg, Brendan Keogh
2.0
I have so much to say about this book, I don't even know where to begin.
The intro is awful. It's like, "Hey guys, we just want to fix your games because they're racist/ sexist/ homephobic/ transphobic, why are you mad?" when a much better intro would have been, "Hey guys, we see you love games, and we'd like to build a gaming community around diversity, inclusiveness, and new types of games we've never seen before."
The latter is a good message and a respectable goal. Great! Sign me up! But the first message often gets treated as if it's the second by people who aren't listening to themselves, then when people get mad the reason for their anger gets confused.
Like bruh, the gaming community isn't attacking you, you're attacking the gaming community.
YEAH I SAID IT. But hang on, hear me out. Or don't. It's your life.
So, because it's relevant: I have lady parts and I am a gamer, and I was once told that "video games aren't for girls" by a seven year old jerk who didn't want to let me have a turn playing Mortal Kombat. Other than that, no one has ever expressed to me that they give a single shit about my gender. Do I believe that women receive gender-specific harassment? Yes. I think there are crappy things that people only say to women. Do I think women get harassed just BECAUSE they are women? Not unless they get unlucky and run into a bitter husk of a human being who has it out for women. Do I think these bitter husks make up a vast majority of gamers? NO.
Now, do I think female game critics get dump trucks full of harassment? YES. There's no doubt in my mind. Years ago I made a post about how I agreed with something Anita Sarkeesian said and a hate mob appeared and yelled at me. Which at the time made me think man, maybe being a woman on the internet really IS dangerous and scary.
In retrospect I now realize what that mob was so angry about, and in retrospect I can see they weren't a bunch of MRAs, Incels, MGTOWs and whatever other fringe group. Most of them were actually trying to talk to me but I was so terrified that I wasn't listening. (I was in the mind set of, "This is it, this is the angry hate mob I've been warned about. They found me." Turns out they literally didn't care about anything I was doing, they just wanted to talk/yell about Anita.)
So okay, I'm someone who has always been annoyed by hypersexualized women in video games because it's so distracting and gross. And I'm all for attractive female characters, trust me. I like a good looking lady as much as the next guy. But sometimes it grotesque. And not in a fun Silent Hill type of way. If a game has a girl with crazy egg boobs and I feel like at any moment I'm about to get a glimpse of her asshole, I say no thank you to that game and move on.
I think the reason some game critics inspire hate mobs is because they act as if a majority of games are unforgivably sexist/racist/etc. I think almost anyone would understand why I'm not interested in games with women who are grotesquely sexy. I can't imagine anyone would fault me for not wanting to play them. BUT if I claimed that games in general are sexist and I don't feel comfortable playing any of them, I'm going to sound ridiculous to anyone who's played more than two games in their life.
But a lot of game critics act as if the extreme cases are the norm. One essay in here claims that women in games are more sexualized now than ever, giving two examples of female characters who are sexier now than they were originally. The claim that women are more sexualized than ever before is absurd. Yes, all female characters are sexier now than they were when they were 8-bit, but the idea that 2015 was the height of sexy female game characters is...come on. Look at Laura Croft. She went from grossly weird sex symbol to normal looking person. This shit goes both ways. I would say if anything, they're as sexy as they've always been, but to me things seem much, much better.
But hey, if we tell a game developer we don't want them to make a hypersexualized character and they do it anyway...that's fine! They're allowed to say no to our business if they'd rather appeal to whoever in is into that shit.
The thing is I have a really hard time believing that gamer culture is filled with people who hate diversity and that most gamers don't want people out there making more inclusive games. Like I personally hate "interactive stories" but do I want to stop you from making and enjoying them? No. Now, if you told me that you want to make every game an "interactive story"...I'm going to get hostile, real fast, because no. gtfo.
But that's how game critics talk. They have a problem with games people love and they tell them they're wrong to like them and they say those games shouldn't exist. That's why people get angry. It's not like hey, we want to get in here and make the types of games we want to see." It's "we have a problem with your games and we want to put a stop to them."
There was recently a controversy where a developer got yelled at because all of his characters are white (and I think dudes) and he refused to change them. Why is that a problem? In my mind, you shouldn't tell a developer what to make any more than you should tell an artist what to paint. But that's what's happening. And that is the problem.
Now if someone was dictating that all his characters had to be white and diversity isn't allowed, yeah, that is racist. That is a problem worth railing against. If you go to make a game with more diversity because you're sick of seeing so many white male characters and you get backlash for simply making that game, that is a problem. If every character in every video game was white...that's a problem. People should be free to make and play the games they want.
But if you need every game to be a game you like that has what you want, you're wrong. Grow up.
Like here's an example that has nothing to do with sexism, racism, or any other ism: There's an essay in here about post-apocalyptic games, and the author arrogantly assumes that if you like them it's because you're a narcissist who thinks you'd outlive everyone else in a nuclear apocalypse and you're playing out your narcissistic fantasy. And he makes the argument that post-apocalyptic games are a problem and he basically says that they should punish you for winning and if they don't they're encouraging a mentality that's bad for society.
Okay. I like post-apocalyptic games. A LOT. You know why? Because I would definitely die first. I like post-apocalyptic games because I get to cheat death. I am an extremely high risk for a particularly deadly kind of cancer, and I really enjoy imagining I would survive against very bad odds even though I don't think I would. I think we're all afraid we're going to die before we're ready, and we all like to imagine what it would be like to survive when we shouldn't. It's thrilling to be like "Holy shit, everything is radioactive and I know I should be dead, but here I am, kicking ass and taking names." In a video game I can take a light jog carrying 200 pounds of guns and amour through a radioactive wasteland, and in real life I have to go to the doctor every six months to get a biopsy to make sure I'm going to see my next birthday. ALSO, in game I'm the good guy, helping strangers rebuild their lives and making the wasteland a better place. If you're going to criticize me for something, make fun of me for being a way better person in a video game than I am in real life.
This author doesn't know me or my motivations. But he thinks he does. He also thinks he has special insight that the rest of us don't have. You want to know what that insight is? It's that nuclear war is dangerous and not a good thing.
Yes. Thank you. I feel so enlightened.
Seriously, he keeps making the point that gamers these days don't know anything about the threat of nuclear war because the cold war is over. As if North Korea isn't a thing. What is the alternate reality this guy lives in where nuclear war isn't a threat anymore? Also, why does he think he's the only gamer that remembers the cold war? The average gamer is 30.
BUT THIS IS WHAT I MEAN. Anita Sarkeesian literally says, "We don't want to take your toys away." and the very next essay literally says, "They have astutely and correctly identified what is going on here. Their toys are being taken away, their tree houses are being boarded up."
These are people who think they're victims, but they're flinging wild accusations and acting like total assholes, and they can't see it. They just think they're being attacked because of sexism, racism, and homophobia. And not because of their garbage opinions and attitudes.
Do I think there was/is sexism in gaming? Yes. I think it used to be really bad. I think we've made a lot of progress. I think there's more that could be done, but I think we've come along way and that's exciting. People are listening to what gamers want! I don't understand why we have to be bitter that straight white guys get to have their games too. It's not like all they do is play games where they commit hate crimes.
Anyway, like three of the essays in here are okay. I'd give them at least three stars, so that's why I didn't give this whole book one star. I also picked up the game Deadly Premonition because of this book, and it made me want to see Blazing Saddles because one essay mentioned that they wanted to see a game handle race the way Blazing Saddles does.
There's one essay in here from the point of view of a Arab man who plays American Shooters and that's an interesting perspective. And while Anita Sarkeesian's opinions have since become like nails on a chalkboard to me, I actually enjoy reading things by Zoe Quinn. Obviously it's annoying that she pretends that everyone hates her because she's a lady game developer and not because her ex told everyone she's a monster, but she's a good writer and she does a good job of stating her opinions without continually insulting everyone which, considering her peers, is amazing. I can't help but feel impressed by her diplomacy.
The intro is awful. It's like, "Hey guys, we just want to fix your games because they're racist/ sexist/ homephobic/ transphobic, why are you mad?" when a much better intro would have been, "Hey guys, we see you love games, and we'd like to build a gaming community around diversity, inclusiveness, and new types of games we've never seen before."
The latter is a good message and a respectable goal. Great! Sign me up! But the first message often gets treated as if it's the second by people who aren't listening to themselves, then when people get mad the reason for their anger gets confused.
Like bruh, the gaming community isn't attacking you, you're attacking the gaming community.
YEAH I SAID IT. But hang on, hear me out. Or don't. It's your life.
So, because it's relevant: I have lady parts and I am a gamer, and I was once told that "video games aren't for girls" by a seven year old jerk who didn't want to let me have a turn playing Mortal Kombat. Other than that, no one has ever expressed to me that they give a single shit about my gender. Do I believe that women receive gender-specific harassment? Yes. I think there are crappy things that people only say to women. Do I think women get harassed just BECAUSE they are women? Not unless they get unlucky and run into a bitter husk of a human being who has it out for women. Do I think these bitter husks make up a vast majority of gamers? NO.
Now, do I think female game critics get dump trucks full of harassment? YES. There's no doubt in my mind. Years ago I made a post about how I agreed with something Anita Sarkeesian said and a hate mob appeared and yelled at me. Which at the time made me think man, maybe being a woman on the internet really IS dangerous and scary.
In retrospect I now realize what that mob was so angry about, and in retrospect I can see they weren't a bunch of MRAs, Incels, MGTOWs and whatever other fringe group. Most of them were actually trying to talk to me but I was so terrified that I wasn't listening. (I was in the mind set of, "This is it, this is the angry hate mob I've been warned about. They found me." Turns out they literally didn't care about anything I was doing, they just wanted to talk/yell about Anita.)
So okay, I'm someone who has always been annoyed by hypersexualized women in video games because it's so distracting and gross. And I'm all for attractive female characters, trust me. I like a good looking lady as much as the next guy. But sometimes it grotesque. And not in a fun Silent Hill type of way. If a game has a girl with crazy egg boobs and I feel like at any moment I'm about to get a glimpse of her asshole, I say no thank you to that game and move on.
I think the reason some game critics inspire hate mobs is because they act as if a majority of games are unforgivably sexist/racist/etc. I think almost anyone would understand why I'm not interested in games with women who are grotesquely sexy. I can't imagine anyone would fault me for not wanting to play them. BUT if I claimed that games in general are sexist and I don't feel comfortable playing any of them, I'm going to sound ridiculous to anyone who's played more than two games in their life.
But a lot of game critics act as if the extreme cases are the norm. One essay in here claims that women in games are more sexualized now than ever, giving two examples of female characters who are sexier now than they were originally. The claim that women are more sexualized than ever before is absurd. Yes, all female characters are sexier now than they were when they were 8-bit, but the idea that 2015 was the height of sexy female game characters is...come on. Look at Laura Croft. She went from grossly weird sex symbol to normal looking person. This shit goes both ways. I would say if anything, they're as sexy as they've always been, but to me things seem much, much better.
But hey, if we tell a game developer we don't want them to make a hypersexualized character and they do it anyway...that's fine! They're allowed to say no to our business if they'd rather appeal to whoever in is into that shit.
The thing is I have a really hard time believing that gamer culture is filled with people who hate diversity and that most gamers don't want people out there making more inclusive games. Like I personally hate "interactive stories" but do I want to stop you from making and enjoying them? No. Now, if you told me that you want to make every game an "interactive story"...I'm going to get hostile, real fast, because no. gtfo.
But that's how game critics talk. They have a problem with games people love and they tell them they're wrong to like them and they say those games shouldn't exist. That's why people get angry. It's not like hey, we want to get in here and make the types of games we want to see." It's "we have a problem with your games and we want to put a stop to them."
There was recently a controversy where a developer got yelled at because all of his characters are white (and I think dudes) and he refused to change them. Why is that a problem? In my mind, you shouldn't tell a developer what to make any more than you should tell an artist what to paint. But that's what's happening. And that is the problem.
Now if someone was dictating that all his characters had to be white and diversity isn't allowed, yeah, that is racist. That is a problem worth railing against. If you go to make a game with more diversity because you're sick of seeing so many white male characters and you get backlash for simply making that game, that is a problem. If every character in every video game was white...that's a problem. People should be free to make and play the games they want.
But if you need every game to be a game you like that has what you want, you're wrong. Grow up.
Like here's an example that has nothing to do with sexism, racism, or any other ism: There's an essay in here about post-apocalyptic games, and the author arrogantly assumes that if you like them it's because you're a narcissist who thinks you'd outlive everyone else in a nuclear apocalypse and you're playing out your narcissistic fantasy. And he makes the argument that post-apocalyptic games are a problem and he basically says that they should punish you for winning and if they don't they're encouraging a mentality that's bad for society.
Okay. I like post-apocalyptic games. A LOT. You know why? Because I would definitely die first. I like post-apocalyptic games because I get to cheat death. I am an extremely high risk for a particularly deadly kind of cancer, and I really enjoy imagining I would survive against very bad odds even though I don't think I would. I think we're all afraid we're going to die before we're ready, and we all like to imagine what it would be like to survive when we shouldn't. It's thrilling to be like "Holy shit, everything is radioactive and I know I should be dead, but here I am, kicking ass and taking names." In a video game I can take a light jog carrying 200 pounds of guns and amour through a radioactive wasteland, and in real life I have to go to the doctor every six months to get a biopsy to make sure I'm going to see my next birthday. ALSO, in game I'm the good guy, helping strangers rebuild their lives and making the wasteland a better place. If you're going to criticize me for something, make fun of me for being a way better person in a video game than I am in real life.
This author doesn't know me or my motivations. But he thinks he does. He also thinks he has special insight that the rest of us don't have. You want to know what that insight is? It's that nuclear war is dangerous and not a good thing.
Yes. Thank you. I feel so enlightened.
Seriously, he keeps making the point that gamers these days don't know anything about the threat of nuclear war because the cold war is over. As if North Korea isn't a thing. What is the alternate reality this guy lives in where nuclear war isn't a threat anymore? Also, why does he think he's the only gamer that remembers the cold war? The average gamer is 30.
BUT THIS IS WHAT I MEAN. Anita Sarkeesian literally says, "We don't want to take your toys away." and the very next essay literally says, "They have astutely and correctly identified what is going on here. Their toys are being taken away, their tree houses are being boarded up."
These are people who think they're victims, but they're flinging wild accusations and acting like total assholes, and they can't see it. They just think they're being attacked because of sexism, racism, and homophobia. And not because of their garbage opinions and attitudes.
Do I think there was/is sexism in gaming? Yes. I think it used to be really bad. I think we've made a lot of progress. I think there's more that could be done, but I think we've come along way and that's exciting. People are listening to what gamers want! I don't understand why we have to be bitter that straight white guys get to have their games too. It's not like all they do is play games where they commit hate crimes.
Anyway, like three of the essays in here are okay. I'd give them at least three stars, so that's why I didn't give this whole book one star. I also picked up the game Deadly Premonition because of this book, and it made me want to see Blazing Saddles because one essay mentioned that they wanted to see a game handle race the way Blazing Saddles does.
There's one essay in here from the point of view of a Arab man who plays American Shooters and that's an interesting perspective. And while Anita Sarkeesian's opinions have since become like nails on a chalkboard to me, I actually enjoy reading things by Zoe Quinn. Obviously it's annoying that she pretends that everyone hates her because she's a lady game developer and not because her ex told everyone she's a monster, but she's a good writer and she does a good job of stating her opinions without continually insulting everyone which, considering her peers, is amazing. I can't help but feel impressed by her diplomacy.