#SkeletonGate
-
-
Mad Max Fury Road was outrageous, intense, insane and done largely with practical effects.
The fact that it's a female led and driven action film made it even better. Definitely my favorite action film of 2015. -
-
It's one of the highest reviewed action movies ever.
Daaaaaaammmmmn. Now I REALLY gotta see this. It'll piss the MRAs off, AND it's a good flick? What a perfect day off!
-
Yeah, I had literally no interest in the new Mad Max before reading that.
Now knowing that MRA-Holes hate it because "It has wimminz being all awesome" in it makes me want to see it now. It getting great reviews cinches it.
Switch Friend Code: SW-1795-2519-1884 • Click Here to check out my Twitch Channel
-
I just saw Fury Road, it was AWESOME! But I fail to see any bad critics, whatever reason, on the internet. Everyone who saw it, even on gamer forums I browse, loved it.
-
wanna see it too, gotta find time
-
It was pretty good. They had me at lots of shirtless dudes running around like psycho children. They kept the romance to a zero which is so excellent. And some really strong females.
I mean its still just a movie about exploding cars but they do it very well.
-
It was pretty good. They had me at lots of shirtless dudes running around like psycho children. They kept the romance to a zero which is so excellent. And some really strong females.
I mean its still just a movie about exploding cars but they do it very well.
I think thats selling it a bit short; Not that it doesn't feature lots of exploding cars, but watching the cars exploding is made interesting and intense because of the underlying themes of religious cultism, abuse and yes, feminism…along with the fact that it takes place in the most imaginative and fully realized world I've seen in ages.
My absolute favourite thing about the movie is that it never stopped to needlessly exposit or explain its world beyond "its the apocalypse now"; You're just dumped right into this setting, the movie lets it speak for itself, and you get it. Its masterfully done, and makes you immerse yourself in the movie completely. At no point in the movie does anyone point at Guitar Guy and ask what his deal is so we can get an explanation, he's just there, and of course he would be there, to whip warriors into a frenzy. -
http://40.media.tumblr.com/b3f0f439766f07135dd1f9ef585b8676/tumblr_nn15adqyrc1qffq28o1_1280.png
http://41.media.tumblr.com/0754c58bfe5503e7591f78d26ffc26b0/tumblr_nn15adqyrc1qffq28o2_1280.png
someone literally sent me a link where some youtube mom says gamergate is okay because videogames are a guy thing and we shouldn't shame their sexuality
is my life even real any more
-
Mad Max is fucking nuts. On one hand, it's clearly a blockbuster, pop-corn movie, full of adrenaline.
On the other hand, it's ugly, and weird, and it doesn't give you 10 minutes expo dumps so you can comfortably fit into its world. You get something here and something there and then you're on your own with it.
And yeah, Charlize eats this movie. She's ridiculously tough, in a good sense. And the hero group at the end of the movie is so bizarre from a regular action movie pov that it's kinda awesome in its own way.
It's not necessarily one of my favorite movies, as, maybe, I prefer more traditional story telling? And it's really coco bananas, with the crazy zoom-ins and zoom-outs, speed-ups and speed-downs and how incredibly loud it is, which makes it a bit hard to digest? But it's definitely a fucking experience you need to watch on a big screen. As a cinematic spectacle, it delivers big time.
-
I did a funny experiment right after watching the movie where I asked my wife (who knows nothing of the "controversy") I asked her, "Can you think of anything controversial that was in the movie?"
She said…
! 'The blood, gore, and violence? Well, and maybe the women who were dressed all skimpily and used as sex slaves. People might be angry over that BUT there was the strong female main character that made up for it, so…yeah, I guess people would be upset over how some of the women were portrayed in the film but even the supermodels ended up showing strength and and resilience to their captor. That's all I can think about.'
Obviously she saw no controversy in there being a strong female character like 99% of everyone else. In fact, she thought if there was any controversy it'd be over the women being used as sex objects. It just really puts in mind how backwards thinking these MRA folks are. Honestly, she didn't see any controversy at all really. I kind of forced the question on her and she just gave me an answer of what others might see as controversial. Conclusion. MRA is also fucking nuts…but not in a good way.Everything's Eventual…
-
Conclusion. MRA is also fucking nuts…but not in a good way.
Wait a minute… there's a good way of being fucking nuts?
If so, then I've been living my life wrong!
-
Wait a minute… there's a good way of being fucking nuts?
If so, then I've been living my life wrong!
Haha, yes, when "fucking nuts" pertains to a fictional apocolyptic world, water wars, and Twisted Metal antics. Not so much for reality. Also, I was going off of Lee's quote.
Mad Max is fucking nuts.
-
Wait, so the movie won't confuse you if you've never seen the originals with Mel Gibson?
I saw a few scenes and I have to agree, things looked chaotic. Even in the few minutes, it seemed like Theron's character said and did more than Hardy's character. Hmm..
-
Wait, so the movie won't confuse you if you've never seen the originals with Mel Gibson?
I saw a few scenes and I have to agree, things looked chaotic. Even in the few minutes, it seemed like Theron's character said and did more than Hardy's character. Hmm..
I've never seen a Mad Max film and had no trouble following along. There is one recurring reference to a past event but you don't really need to know specifics to get the importance. I didn't know when I went in but I understood immediately the implication.
! The dead girl who keeps showing up is apparently his daughter
-
Wait, so the movie won't confuse you if you've never seen the originals with Mel Gibson?
I've never seen the originals but I'm fixing that this weekend. Suffice to say I was a little confused in the beginning but you can basically sum most of the movie up as a long ass car chase. There are some very brief and flickering flashback scenes/hallucinations but those are pretty self-explanatory. Everything else dealing with why there is a chase is explained in the movie and the whole plot is self-contained.
I saw a few scenes and I have to agree, things looked chaotic. Even in the few minutes, it seemed like Theron's character said and did more than Hardy's character. Hmm..
I can confirm Hardy's character doesn't even talk that much and for the beginning of the film he's briefly absent but as he warms up to the….situation he comes around, but yeah Theron's character does talk more and shares a deservedly hefty screentime.
-
Wait, so the movie won't confuse you if you've never seen the originals with Mel Gibson?
You can randomly watch any Mad Max film because they're basically all completely stand alone films.
The first three all barely seem to take place in the same universe outside the basic concept (though the first one bucks even that), this one seems content to continue that tradition.Mad Max as a series is just = A guy called Max is badass and walks around post-apocalyptic Australia and winds up involved in stuff where he kicks butts. Also the plots tend not to be his conflict and he mostly seems just like some quiet guy, and also comes off a bit different every movie so you see how this was easy to start up 30 years later with a new actor.
-
I propose a title change to #SkeletonRoad: The Redpill Fury
Someone married their stepmom and then got murdered?
Sounds like he used a monkey paw to make a porno story come true.
Then the curse of the paw eventually killed him.
-
Or #SkeletonHeart: I made it!
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
-
I've never seen a Mad Max film and had no trouble following along.
I've never seen the originals but I'm fixing that this weekend. Suffice to say I was a little confused in the beginning but you can basically sum most of the movie up as a long ass car chase. There are some very brief and flickering flashback scenes/hallucinations but those are pretty self-explanatory. Everything else dealing with why there is a chase is explained in the movie and the whole plot is self-contained.
@Monkey:
You can randomly watch any Mad Max film because they're basically all completely stand alone films.
The first three all barely seem to take place in the same universe outside the basic concept (though the first one bucks even that), this one seems content to continue that tradition.Mad Max as a series is just = A guy called Max is badass and walks around post-apocalyptic Australia and winds up involved in stuff where he kicks butts. Also the plots tend not to be his conflict and he mostly seems just like some quiet guy, and also comes off a bit different every movie so you see how this was easy to start up 30 years later with a new actor.
So basically, I won't be lost if I go see it. Thanks guys, maybe I'll check it out. I was kinda surprised to see all of these glowing reviews (never judge a book by its cover, as they say)
-
Just saw it today and I hate to say that it's legitimately the most fantastic film I've ever seen, sorry people who were hoping that feminists were forcing critics to like this film.
-
-
Haven't watched and probably wouldn't be able to watch Fury Road due to roadblocks (hah!) in life (at least not until the DVD comes out) but I just stumbled upon this (kinda) negative review of it - whatcha all think?
the movie was filmed in a literal desert "looks too much like a vacation resort"
she doesnt really say why she thinks its bad feminism besides the fact that she doesn't like the 'mother earth' narrative
ALSO one paragraph shes yelling "THAT SUPPOSED TO BE SUBTEXT" then literally asks about furiosa's backstory thats obviously subtext
bad article
-
Meh, I can understand the critic not wanting to label this a feminist film but the points she makes to claim it is playing to the same old sexist tropes seem pretty flawed.
! Criticizing the attractiveness of the characters that an old tyrant who treats women like objects chose as his sex slaves? Or implying that because a character is beautiful she cannot be convincingly strong and is not a proper representation of a woman? And complaining about the whole "mother earth" trope seems especially silly since the movie's major plot twist involved revealing that the green place was a fantasy and that even a society where women (who were shown to be every bit as violent as their male counterparts) are left to their own devices is capable of failing.
Honestly, I was just happy to see a good action film that had women in more varied roles and very little romance.
-
The film's not as feminist as it's always made out to be but that article has a lot of problems, namely how much it talks about the actresses' looks/bodies. And I'm not sure why the author makes it sound like Weaver being 6 feet makes her a better hero. That doesn't sound like a feminist friendly message, to say the least.
More stuff, written better than I ever could:
http://iloathethesea.tumblr.com/post/120650714892/some-troubling-things-vol-1-the-conversation -
Haven't watched and probably wouldn't be able to watch Fury Road due to roadblocks (hah!) in life (at least not until the DVD comes out) but I just stumbled upon this (kinda) negative review of it - whatcha all think?
Them looking diverse sorta made sense, looking like they were perfectly selected for some range and looks…well shit they were the literal harem of a warlord. They were selected on that basis IN PLOT.
Well that and they weren't super diverse anyway. Three of them were white, one was uh...some sort of tan lady who could have been white given certain squinting, and the last was a light skinned black lady.
Yeah it was a teensy male-gazey when we first see them out in the sun, but that follows immediately into a physical fight involving all of them, Charlize, Max, and the one good Warboy (who was not yet good).
Their acting was fine, dumb complaint.
Also they didn't have a leading figure, the one she talks about is pregnant and slightly more prominent early on but not at all later. The redhead and black one have eventually equal billing to one extent or another.That no primitive patriarch in his right mind would ever choose these particular women as “breeders” to keep his colony alive is immediately apparent.
He's not trying to keep anything alive except his own bloodline by whatever standard of beauty and perfection goes through his head. He rules over a big population who no doubt are quite capable of reproducing themselves, and his two sons he does have are either badly deformed or a big stupid musclehead.
Of course, Charlize Theron as Furiosa benefits from proximity to the supermodels who make her seem, by comparison, ferociously strong and a better actor than Meryl Streep. She’s tall enough to seem physically imposing, and she moves with athleticism. But she also brings with her the legacy of so many Dior perfume ads: the soft, tiny-nosed, blonde prettiness that her crew cut merely accentuates
yo this lady writing the article apparently thinks a good critique on feminist grounds is saying Charlize Theron sucks in the role because of her face shape and hair color (that doesn't exist in the movie anyway lol) are too ..something.
Like not makeup or hair-do or anything mistakingly applied that make her too..pretty? Feminine??
But that the basic way she looks as a person is too something something bad for feminism.
Which is really kind of horribly sexist innit.Just compare this example of onscreen feminism to Sigourney Weaver in Alien (1979). Weaver was six feet tall, odd, angular, smart and forceful, with highly individual, non-model looks and a remarkably ambitious actor’s resume, shot in unforgiving light and wearing a unisex worker’s uniform. In movies, we haven’t come a long way, baby.
"Women I think of as more attractive should not be action heroes because it's sexist to have a face structure that looks like this or that compared to someone else."
Progressive real talk.Also Alien for no good reason had Ripley in undies during the final action scene, also she had hair and both limbs intact and wasn't constantly covered in engine grease from the nose up.
Also don't take anyone masturbating over the old three movies too seriously because in every way this one's better aside from 2's pioneering of a lot of the tropes.
The COOL OLD GRIT she's talking about in 2 was definitely just the outback being filmed as is on a humble budget and not intentional. The people Max saves in that movie have horribly dated white goofball clothing that almost look like a bad Star Trek movie set.2 and (oh god) especially 3 had annoying stupid child characters. In 3 it almost becomes like some sort of fucking Hook meets the Apocalypse thing by the end, blargh.
-
Why isn't the film in gross neutral grey colors like a real apocalyptic setting!! I'm confused!!!!
-
I demand Tina Turner in my hyper realistic post-apocalyptic Australia.
-
I was gonna make a thread in the Media section on how blown away by this film I was but honestly this thread seemed like a better fit since it's now unofficially kinda the "Discussion on Feminist Tropes in Media" thread (until the fucking #Skeletongate apologetics come back again URGH):
Now I know what some of y'all're thinking: GAWD THIS TRAILER. HAVEN'T WE HAD ENOUGH OF STUPID FAT WOMEN CHARACTERS IN HOLLYWOOD - SERIOUSLY THE "ANTI-"OBJECTIFICATION HERE IS DISGUSTING. OH LEMME GUESS THEY'LL TRY TO BE PROGRESSIVE AS FUCK AND TRY TO DO MACFARLANE-DIPSHIT-DUDEBRO-SATIRE ON HOW 'YAAAAY FAT WOMEN ARE PEOPLE TOO Y'KNOW BUT WE'RE STILL GONNA MAKE THEM THE BUTT (LOLOLOL) OF OUR JOKES BECAUSE HEY AREN'T OVERWEIGHT PEOPLE WITH BOOBS INHERENTLY FUNNY???'. TYPICAL HOLLYWOOD BULLSHIT.
Yeah, I myself bought into some of these misconceptions above, but trust me, this is a pretty great example of "shitty trailer, awesome movie". Maybe it was even intentional, given how surprisingly subversive of various spy/comedy tropes the film can be:
[spoileriffic plot details ahead][hide]That they even bothered to make Melissa McCarthy's character a legit badass agent who really had her lack of self-confidence holding her back all this while would've been enough to make me ecstatic - but the film earns a shitton of goodwill through how it doesn't just play with the spy genre in a really friendly and affectionate way (check out the action scenes!) but also does snarky, maybe even downright snappy commentary against some (potentially problematic) spy cliches and tropes.
Jason Statham brings his A-game Adam Westing his way through TOUGH-BRITISH-AGENT-WHO-DON'T-GIVE-NO-FUCKS-ville with his condescendingly egotistical attitude towards McCarthy, where he often becomes the butt of jokes with his narcissistic complacency getting him into more trouble (or at least more blatant trouble) than our main star. And Jude Law does similar stabs at self-parody where his agent character… takes a left-field turn throughout points of the film, shall we say.
To say nothing of Rose Byrne's character who is a riff on the DARK FEMALE LOVE INTEREST trope in the film. I don't wanna give too much on her role away - so let's just say she's one of those "all bark no bite" folks you like to see (or rather mock) in films.
I could go on and on but seriously at this point there's just this point where I gotta stop yapping and you gotta START WATCHING THIS FILM FOR YOURSELF.
And even if you don't care for all this feminism and progressive politics in your movies, it's still a pretty damn amazingly entertaining film at the end of the day. Like I mentioned, the action choreography is TOP NOTCH and there's a buncha actors all giving it their comedy best - Peter Serafinowicz, Allison Janney, Miranda Hart... it's like you feel that Feig-McCarthy, the creative team behind this venture, went "How we gonna make people look on disapprovingly at our premise - then feel REALLY DUMB when they actually watch this film". It worked on me at least.[/hide]
But hey, if my analysis here doesn't convince you, maybe these fine folks will. Definitely at the very least probably going to be one of the most underrated films of the year.If you're one of those that has indeed watched this film - and loved it! - then let us fan-gasm together! If you're one of those that watched it but hated it somehow, I don't know why you exist but OK.
Probably not better than Mad Max: Fury Road (DAMMIT NEED TO WATCH THIS ALREADY) but it's better than the Kingsman film (another spy film from this year I was similarly taken by surprise for) and unless Daniel Craig steps up his game this may even be better than the SPECTRE film coming up later this year.
-
Oh god, Yes. I just saw Spy and I agree with you 100%. It's like, if you want the gritty, action-y apocalypse feminist movie then go see Max Max (which I still haven't seen!). But if you want a comedy feminist movie (which can exist) then go see Spy. It's worth is alone to see Jason Statham play a comedic version of himself (it looks like he's having a ball, too). It's got a high rating on Rotten Tomatoes for a reason.
-
I just realised I could have saved my self a lot of breath/finger energy by just describing this movie as "Archer:The Movie", but with Pam as the main character instead graaaah
But yes this is indeed the office workplace snark twin cousin to the desert apocalypse film Mad Max.
"I LEARNT TO PLAY THE PIANO AT AN ADVANCED AGE"
-
I just saw 'Spy' today and hands down the best moments of the movie was the angry chemistry and snappy comments between Mellissa McCarthy and Jason Statham. Comedy gold.
-
And now the fuckwads are going after a woman getting a PhD in gaming studies. Only she has a different name for them: Deatheaters:
http://www.themarysue.com/phd-in-gamergate/ -
grits teeth
How pathetic do you have to be to micromanage your time to dedicate yourself to downright ruining another person's life? And for what purpose, at what cost? All because some mean girl on the Interwebz made fun of your little game you and your friends play? Get a fucking hold of yourself; video game criticism doesn't mean that gaming publications have to kiss your goddamn boots. Oh somebody found something problematic in your game? Tough luck, suck your thumb and get over it - different strokes for different people. You think the arguments are shoddy and find the analysis weak? Then engage in a civil discussion fit for mature adults AND NONE OF THIS MOTHERFUCKING DOXXING BULLSHIT.
The fuck kind of message are you trying to send anyway? "WAAAAH I'M AN ANGRY MANCHILD WHO THROWS HUGE TANTRUMS WHEN FEMINISTS SAY THE GAME I PLAY ISN'T PERFECT" - yeah you're totally gonna get the respect you deserve from the people 'round you.
Suffice to say, if after reading all this bullcrap you still want to play the 'high horse' card about how we're all being 'rabid SJWs' and that we aren't seeing this 'from the correct perspective', I hold you in contempt. So much fucking contempt.
end rant
-
We love John Oliver:
And of course the 'gaters respond practically BEFORE it plays, but whatevs:
http://jezebel.com/gamergate-shits-pants-over-john-oliver-segment-on-onlin-1713058755 -
We love John Oliver:
And of course the 'gaters respond practically BEFORE it plays, but whatevs:
http://jezebel.com/gamergate-shits-pants-over-john-oliver-segment-on-onlin-1713058755That is one of the most depressing youtube comment sections I have seen in a while. Like, holy shit.
-
That is one of the most depressing youtube comment sections I have seen in a while. Like, holy shit.
Damn now I got fight the urge to not look myself.
-
-
Aren't YT comment sections by their very nature supposed to be exhibits of the very worst of human behaviour?
Or is this one even horrible according to those standards?
Other sites are more accurate standards of the worst in humanity. I think the yahoo news comment section is particularly toxic.
Youtube is a wild card, but if you go to videos like Neutral response videos (From futurama) you will instead discover some of the best in humanity.
-
Oh yeah Yahoo News is just the worst.
Maybe it's just the videos I go to; I've seen God knows how many "THIS VIDEO IS RACIST AGAINST WHITES" and "LOL GOD SUX" comments on all the Key&Peele vids I watch.
On the flipside, the Wisecrack videos I watch have relatively civilised discussions going on. Target audiences and whatnot.
-
Aren't YT comment sections by their very nature supposed to be exhibits of the very worst of human behaviour?
Or is this one even horrible according to those standards?
I once saw a good youtube comments section. It was a genuine unicorn moment.
So basically the video was a PRANK GONE WRONG vid. In it some college age dude is going around randomly pretending to flirt with guys, he's pretend gay or whatever.
He goes up to this one middle aged Indian guy and the dude responds positively and is like asking him if they want to go to a hotel.
The vid uploader basically tries framing this in the video descriptions and annotations as LOOK AT THIS PEDOPHILE LOOK AT THIS CREEP.So the entire video comments were full of "You're not underage and are a little pathetic goober who couldn't actually take being hit on back by an actual gay person. qq more. This dude didn't do anything wrong."
And all was right in the world. -
Apparently, Aurini and Owen are splitsville again. Aurini says he needs money to finish editing and Owen says that Aurini is just trying to wring more money out of the donors. No word on if the film will ever be released. Also, I can't stop laughing.
Story via We Hunted The Mammoth -
What the, I don't even know what to say right now.
I've only followed some of the controversy of various things here and there, but this is just stupid. So some people wanted to get funded to make a "documentary" about Anita Sarkessian, and everything went to hell. The worst I can say about her having only seen two of her videos is that her presentation is dry and I have a hard time listening because of that.
Really, it's not the a "Sarkessian Effect" that all this went down, it was the "Internet Effect" or "Social Media Effect". People are readily butt hurt at the smallest comment that might go against their view. Not realizing that lashing out angrily just proves the point, everyone can post and gather everyone of like minds to be outraged. In this case, the idiocy of calling Anita names and all the ugly stuff caused others to come out and decide to do something. From there, the original group decided to make this much bigger than it needed to be, and she became so big because of their own doing.
-
I've often wondered about that myself; seems like being supported by people who only want you there so the world can end in fire (with you going to Hell in the process) would be somewhat off-putting
3DS Friend Code 0044-2806-5284
-
To be fair to Green and the scientists conducting this study it was nice getting some official confirmation on this.
Then again MRAs and Red Pillers operate on a different plane of logic from the rest of us folks so this would hardly change their obstinate stances about gender whatnot (worse they'll think of some way to twist it to fit their bullshit martyr narrative)
-
To be fair to Green and the scientists conducting this study it was nice getting some official confirmation on this.
Then again MRAs and Red Pillers operate on a different plane of logic from the rest of us folks so this would hardly change their obstinate stances about gender whatnot (worse they'll think of some way to twist it to fit their bullshit martyr narrative)
It's a lengthy read but the key points are here.
While playing with male teammates, men generally follow rules associated with navigating hierarchies. Skill did not moderate focal player positivity towards a male-voiced teammate, but higher skilled individuals were less negative. In addition, when performing poorly, players increased the number of positive and neutral statements (Table 1), and were generally less negative towards a male-voiced teammate (Fig 3). As decreased cooperation or behaviours that lead to failure are often punished by teammates [[URL="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0131613#pone.0131613.ref035"]35,36], the increase of positive and neutral statements and relatively less-frequent use of negative statements suggests poor-performing, lower-skilled males are demonstrating submissive behaviour towards a male-voiced teammate.
Males behaved in the opposite manner when playing with a female-voiced teammate. Overall, the female-voiced manipulation experienced a greater frequency of negative comments, but female-directed negativity decreased as focal-player performance improved (Fig 3). In addition, focal-player skill further moderated player behaviour with the lowest-skilled males behaving less positively towards a female voice. Focal players also increased the use of positive statements as their skill increased (Figs 1 & 2). Taken together, these results suggest that it is lower-skilled poorer-performing males that are significantly more hostile towards females, and higher-skilled focal players are more supportive.
Our results support an evolutionary argument for why low-status, low-performing males are hostile towards female competitors. Dominance is tightly linked to fitness in men as studies from hunter-gatherer societies demonstrate that dominance rank increases fitness through offspring number [[URL="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0131613#pone.0131613.ref014"]14] and resource availability [[URL="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0131613#pone.0131613.ref012"]12]. Even in modern day society, dominance and not attractiveness is associated with college male mating success [[URL="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0131613#pone.0131613.ref013"]13]. Low-status and low-performing males have the most to lose as a consequence of the hierarchical reconfiguration due to the entry of a competitive woman. As men often rely on aggression to maintain their dominant social status [[URL="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0131613#pone.0131613.ref037"]37], the increase in hostility towards a woman by lower-status males may be an attempt to disregard a female’s performance and suppress her disturbance on the hierarchy to retain their social rank. This idea is reinforced by the fact that higher-skilled males that should not feel threatened by a female increased their number of positive comments.
Apart from restructuring the hierarchy, a high status female poses a secondary threat to relatively lower status males: as women are attracted to dominance [[URL="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0131613#pone.0131613.ref013"]13], a high-status female is less likely to find lower-status males attractive. We argue that a secondary benefit of increased female-directed hostility is that it simultaneously decreases a female’s confidence and perception of her self-worth (i.e. negging) while simultaneously increasing the perception of him being a dominant (i.e. socially valuable) mate. Higher-skilled (i.e. more dominant) males do not behave in this manner as there is no need for them to reinforce their dominance to maintain their attractiveness. Although there is no direct evidence in the literature that negative behaviour towards females increases a male’s mating opportunity, our results provide an interesting testable hypothesis requiring further investigation.
There are two alternative social explanations for our results. First, players could be responding to the novelty of having a female voiced teammate in a male-dominated environment. Indeed, a female speaking while playing first-person shooter games is rare as none of the 189 players recorded were female. However, novelty is not the driver of the differences in behaviour as performance and skill mediated the number of positive and negative statements. Second, individuals may simply be responding more aggressively towards individuals with a higher pitched voice (a female in this case), as dominance is predictable by voice pitch [[URL="http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0131613#pone.0131613.ref038"]38]. Although we cannot rule out this possibility, it’s still in line with our finding that individuals feel more threatened by lower-status individuals.
However it was a highly focused test - using an XBOX 360 only and using 1 online game Halo 3 for less than 200 interactions - the interactions were based off pre-recorded messages of the male and female "players" which were neutral toned and played sparingly limiting interaction to just recording and not a real exchange of people using real interactions.
It would need to be repeated across many forms of games and social interactions to be properly assessed - also you would need to have some background information on the players to properly get an idea on whether it is based solely on the skill of the player or if the players lifestyle also influences the behaviour. Otherwise the experiment is quite thought provoking but hardly a smoking gun or even an excuse to ridicule online groups by association.
The study is peer reviewed however it is done on a site that requires a submission fee to be paid prior to being assessed for publication - PLOS ONE has had some bad reputations in the past - and even had its "Peer reviewed" status called into question but is still considered peer reviewed. The Media seems to be doing a good job in representing the report in their text however their Headlines are click-baiting the subject and reducing it to further misuse by people who either skim the report - or don't read the Submission.
-
Just felt like sharing a laugh.
 
